Re: Brute force re-entry
From: william mook (william.mook_at_mokindustries.com)
Date: 08/16/04
- Next message: william mook: "Exotic Propulsion ?"
- Previous message: william mook: "Re: Quantum entanglement propulsion"
- In reply to: Henry Spencer: "Re: Brute force re-entry"
- Next in thread: Rodney Kelp: "Re: Brute force re-entry"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
To: sci-space-tech@moderators.isc.org Date: 16 Aug 2004 07:17:50 -0700
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/gidefinl.pdf
Here's some information on what goes into reusable spacecraft design.
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/shuenara.htm
Here's a picture of an alternative to the Shuttle, that in my
estimation would have been better than the Shuttle's present delta
wing.
An even better version would have been a slender cylinder with
straight wings deployed at subsonic speeds. Think of a tomahawk
cruise missle. This was proposed for the Russian PKA
http://www.friends-partners.org/partners/mwade/craft/pka.htm
VonBraun planned to recover his boosters with a parachute solid rocket
combination. The booster would slow after cutoff. Then, at terminal
speed, a chute would deploy. Finally, a solid rocket assembly would
bring the booster to a safe touchdown.
I like the idea of a 7 element vehicle that consists of 7 cylinders -
each with tomahawk style deployable wings. Each with appropriate
thermal protection for its speed regime. Each with a LOX/LH RL10
based pump system - aerospike engine.
The 7 cylinders operate together at lift off. They drain four of the
7 - feeding all 7 with cross feeding. The four detach and three
continue on. Two of the three remaining are drained to feet the three
remaining. These detach when they're empty. Finally, the one
continues on to nearly orbit. A small kick stage circularizes the
orbit aboard the payload. All 7 elements return to Earth and
re-enter, then deploy wings when subsonic speed is achieved. An
aircraft loitering downrange near the impact point of each cylinder,
snags it Corona capsule fashion, except here the 'capsule' has a
shallower glide slope since its using wings and not parachutes, and a
GPS system in both the plane and the 'capsule.'
The winged cylinders glide back to be snagged by planes loitering at
predetermined locations. The gliders are towed back to the launch
center and released - to be reused.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/corona.htm
henry@spsystems.net (Henry Spencer) wrote in message news:<I2BKqG.1vu@spsystems.net>...
> In article <4ofSc.425593$Gx4.392265@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> Lizerd <1@2.com.retro.com> wrote:
> >Early on in the space program, the space capsule used brute force re-entry.
> >IE: it slammed into the upper atmosphere at high speed to slow down for
> >return.
>
> That is the only method anyone has ever used for reentry, from that day
> to this: atmospheric braking. The details have gotten fancier (in most
> cases), but the basic scheme of things has not.
>
> >The space shuttle is a lifting body.
> >Why can't it fly back???
>
> It does. The Apollo and Gemini capsules were lifting bodies too, by the
> way (and so is Soyuz). They all use aerodynamic lift to stretch their
> reentries out as much as they can. But there are severe fundamental
> limits to what can be done. Even pushing it as far as the shuttle orbiter
> does incurs serious penalties, notably a thermal protection system which
> is complicated and rather fragile compared to the simple and robust
> heatshields the capsules used.
>
> >If the shuttle hit the atmosphere slower, use aero braking and descend at
> >a shallower angle, the shuttle could return at a slower decent rate, and not
> >be subjected to the high temptures.
>
> The longer, slower reentry the shuttle uses makes its thermal problems
> *worse*, not better. The prolonged baking is actually rather harder to
> handle than a quick blowtorching.
>
> In any case, this isn't a question of the shuttle being deliberately
> operated in some stupid, suboptimal way. It *already* uses aerodynamic
> lift as much as it can without melting something off.
- Next message: william mook: "Exotic Propulsion ?"
- Previous message: william mook: "Re: Quantum entanglement propulsion"
- In reply to: Henry Spencer: "Re: Brute force re-entry"
- Next in thread: Rodney Kelp: "Re: Brute force re-entry"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
