Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: mmaker@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 15 Apr 2006 05:58:58 -0700
Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
If you focused on JUST a Mark II version of the orbiter you don't have to
requalify the tank, engines or SRBs.
And the odds of NASA 'focussing on JUST a Mark II version of the
Orbiter' are slightly lower than the odds of me winning the lottery
this week.
With the current version of the CEV, you have to requalify the SRBs, flight
qualify the J2S (or whatever they settle on) and build a new capsule.
No they don't. They could have built the spam can and stuck it on an
existing EELV, but that's not the NASA way. If they were given a
go-ahead to build a Shuttle 2.0, I think it's a pretty safe bet that
there would be a flyback booster in there somewhere, which would be far
more expensive to develop than the stick.
Certainly it would not be flying with the current ET and SRB: at an
absolute minimum they'd want to make all the 'improvements' they can
think of, including quite possibly dumping the SRBs altogether for
liquid boosters, all of which would require recertifying the entire
design.
I'm of the opinion they're thrownigout the baby with the bathwater.
Columbia scared a number of people and also gave a good excuse to exit the
shuttle program. Unfortunately the exit was to something that's looking to
be a bigger mistake.
The exit was the goal. Whether or not the CEV works is irrelevant,
because the government just wanted to kill the shuttle... in 2010 with
the shuttle out of the way and the CEV years late and billions over
budget, it will be easy to kill government-funded manned spaceflight
altogether.
Mark
.
- References:
- Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: Mike Dennis
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: John Doe
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: mmaker
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: John Doe
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: mmaker
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
- Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Prev by Date: Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Next by Date: Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Previous by thread: Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Next by thread: Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
