From: ansible@typhoon.xnet.com   
      
   Henry Spencer  wrote:   
      
   >The key question of a rocket-powered rotor is not whether it produces more   
   >thrust at the start, but whether it gains you enough in total -- bearing   
   >in mind that launchers want to accelerate very rapidly and that propeller   
   >efficiency drops off badly as speeds rise -- to be worth its mass.  Gary   
   >Hudson said that for the classical Roton design, the bottom line on rotor   
   >lift was about neutral for ascent -- no big gain, no big loss -- with the   
   >main benefits being its other roles:  drag device during reentry, lift   
   >device for landing, and centrifugal pump for powered flight.   
      
   Armadillo had significant problems with controlling the pressure of the   
   feed lines to the rockets on the tips of their rotor.   
      
   I would be interested in learning how RR was able to cope with this, and   
   have such well-controlled flights.   
      
   But I suppose that's one of the bits of precious IP left over from the   
   company's demise, and it is sitting in somebody's drawer, doing no one   
   any good right now.   
      
   James Graves   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)