> What i mean is that you are unlikely to be continuously using a liquid
> fuelled engine continuously on a deep space mission with men on board,
> they are just not suited for that purpose. Far more likely is some form of
> Ion engine.
Yes, but a liquid engine would still be useful for jumping out of orbits of
planets, or manuerving to miss something nasty.
> Also, I'd think that it would be unlikely that any craft would pressurise
> the engine pump area etc, it would be expensive and difficult to
> maintain
> in itself, so as sound can, in the absence of air, only travel through
> structure, there is no noise anyway!
How hard is it to pressurize an area? Is it considered a major engineering
challenge? It can't be as hard as going to the bottom of the sea. Thanks,
David
Ian Stirling - 27 Sep 2003 22:07 GMT
>> What i mean is that you are unlikely to be continuously using a liquid
>> fuelled engine continuously on a deep space mission with men on board,
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Yes, but a liquid engine would still be useful for jumping out of orbits of
> planets, or manuerving to miss something nasty.
It's almost always best (for orbital mechanics reasons) to make all
manouevers at the maximum thrust you can.
Combine this with the low energy of chemical fuels and you'r looking at
burns of several minutes at most.
There is little point in trying to repair something when it's in use if
it's going to stop being in use before you can get the cover off.

Signature
http://inquisitor.i.am/ | mailto:inquisitor@i.am | Ian Stirling.
---------------------------+-------------------------+--------------------------
"The device every conquerer, yes, every altruistic liberator should be required
to wear on his shield... is a little girl and her kitten, at ground zero"
- Sir Dominic Flandry in Poul Andersons 'A Knight of Ghosts and Shadows'