In article ,
Derek Lyons wrote:
Handwaving away the shock problems inherent in a land touch down, no
they are not a particular challenge. Modifying the Apollo capsule so
that it can tolerate the shock is a very different matter.

This is actually quite straightforward to solve, if you are willing to
postulate a new design which exploits the greater capsule size possible.
On close examination, the hard part of a touchdown without some sort of
terminal velocity reduction (braking rockets, parafoil flare maneuver,
whatever) is trying to reduce the velocity to zero with a very short
shock-absorber stroke.

But there is *no reason* why the stroke has to be so short! Make the
outer (aerodynamic) hull substantially larger than the inner (pressure)
hull, so there is room for a long-stroke shock-absorber system in between.
If you have the extra size -- quite feasible, for an EELV launch -- then
you just need a chief designer who is willing to dig in his heels and
insist that the empty space within the outer hull will *remain* empty, and
will *not* fill up with equipment/cargo/etc. just because it's there.

And that's assuming you're still using Apollo-style parachute descent,
rather than interesting alternatives like rotor landing, jet lift,
deploying a hot-air balloon rather than a parachute, etc.
--
MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer
first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! |