 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Shuttle / January 2004Simple, cheap way to space?
Howdy, I realize that there's more to getting to LEO than meets the eye. Can a few of you better versed people explain why an idea along these lines won't work? How about an expendable, solid fuel only, booster? It seems to me an ICBM like booster could be fashioned with tapered segments to prevent unreasonable acceleration loads. It would have very few moving parts and could tailored to launch a certain mass. If you're below that mass, you could just add ballast. This has certainly been considered, but it would be interesting to hear why there are no well known boosters like this. Thanks for for the comments in advance...... 140LB > Howdy, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > 140LB Main downsides to solids is they can't be throttled and they can't be shut down in emergencies. I'd bet that if liquids could be operated as cheaply as solids NASA would dump the SRBs in a heartbeat. That gets me to wondering, is some sort of hybrid possible? One that used, say, a solid fuel, but a liquid oxidizer (or the other way around) that would solve the throttleability and provide a means to shut down. JazzMan  Signature********************************************************** Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net. Curse those darned bulk e-mailers! ********************************************************** "Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry ********************************************************** >>Howdy, >> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > JazzMan >>Howdy, >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > liquids could be operated as cheaply as solids NASA would > dump the SRBs in a heartbeat. Of course you can shut down solids - thrust termination of solid motors is well-understood and a necessary function of all ICBMs. Brett > That gets me to wondering, is some sort of hybrid > possible? One that used, say, a solid fuel, but a > liquid oxidizer (or the other way around) that would > solve the throttleability and provide a means to shut > down. If that were possible it would also make a good technology for rocket fuel out of Lunar material. We might be able to mine oxygen, but there are hardly any elements around to make polyurethane or other or- ganic solids. Hydrogen is scarce, too, so an all-liquid design is not practical--at least not out of all-Lunar resources. Would a liquid/solid mix be possible? Signature__ "A good leader knows when it's best to ignore the __ ('__`> screams for help and focus on the bigger picture." <'__`) //6(6; ©OOL mmiv :^)^\\ `\_-/ http://home.t-online.de/home/ulrich.schreglmann/redbaron \-_/' > Would a liquid/solid mix be possible? IIRC, SpaceShipOne uses liquid/solid hybrid Signaturefree men own guns - slaves don't www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.