home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.space.tech      Technical and general issues related to      3,113 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 2,325 of 3,113   
   Len Lekx to All   
   Re: LH2/LOX in the first stage   
   07 Jan 05 13:57:10   
   
   From: LFLekx@NOSPAM.rogers.com.retro.com   
      
   On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 00:16:59 GMT, henry@spsystems.net (Henry Spencer)   
   wrote:   
      
   >>   You don't think it's more like the Atlas stage-and-a-half   
   >>system...?  :-)   
   >To my mind, "stage and a half" is properly applied only to systems which   
   >(like the classical Atlas) have a staging event in which the departing   
   >hardware isn't a complete stage.  (One can argue over whether it has to be   
      
      Point taken.  I had considered the dropping-off of motors to be   
   half-staging... and SRBs (to me...) count as motors.  :-)   
      
      With all the talk about LH2/LO2 versus non-cryogens, and given that   
   the Columbia crash was reportedly (I don't think we'll *ever* know for   
   sure...) caused by that chunk of insulation striking the wing of the   
   orbiter, I decided to see what would happen if I replaced the   
   cryogenic propellants with non-cryogens.  No other changes to the   
   system yet, just the propellants...   
      
      I dug out an old copy of "The Space Shuttle Operators Manual" for   
   some extremely rough numbers, but:   
      
      If the current hydrogen tank is filled with hydrogen peroxide, the   
   liquid-oxygen tank has enough volume to be filled with the necessary   
   amount of JP-5 kerosene to burn it all.  (Plus some extra...)  The   
   GLOW of the vehicle becomes 3,900,000 kilograms, instead of the   
   2,000,000 kilos now.  I have to work out detailed delta-V numbers, but   
   a cursory calculation suggests an increase of close to 3km/s over the   
   existing Shuttle system.  Thrust and fuel-consumption numbers I still   
   have to work out, and I haven't figured in performance improvements   
   due to removing the weight of the insulation, but it looks promising.   
      
      (Bear in mind that this is a cursory analysis, done at 2AM this   
   morning...)   
      
      Which got me on another track - if a Shuttle were launched from   
   Churchill Falls, MB... where would the ET fall...?  :-)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca