Re: Steel mesh on Booster
- From: John Doe <jdoe@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 03:24:57 -0400
Brian Gaff wrote:
I think the funniest skit on this idea I read was a whole spoof argument
from someone saying that the tank should be covered in a giant condom.
Don't laugh. If the shuttle were russian, they would have long ago
struck a deal with trojan for marketing rights of such a "condom, and
the revenus alone might well pay for the extra weight and manufacture of
the rubber coating.
Basically, what you need is some thin layer that can expand/conrtract.
So if there are cracks in the underlying foam, the ruber would continue
to cover and air flow during flight wouldn't go into the crack and thus
not be able to lift pieces of foam off.
What NASA really needs is perhaps better rules on weather. Don't tank
the bloody thing unless you have a very good idea that you can go on the
day. And perhaps move the filling of the ET closer to launch to reduce
weather uncertainties. Remove the fill/empty/fill cycles, and the foam
is probably going to be in much better condition.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Steel mesh on Booster
- From: Dale
- Re: Steel mesh on Booster
- References:
- Steel mesh on Booster
- From: gravitar
- Re: Steel mesh on Booster
- From: Brian Gaff
- Steel mesh on Booster
- Prev by Date: Re: after the next accident...
- Next by Date: Re: Steel mesh on Booster
- Previous by thread: Re: Steel mesh on Booster
- Next by thread: Re: Steel mesh on Booster
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|