View Single Post
  #28  
Old March 6th 07, 12:47 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,sci.space.shuttle
Hyper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 270
Default The 100/10/1 Rule.

On Mar 6, 3:26 am, (Henry Spencer) wrote:

Interestingly enough, both the Titan II first stage and the S-IC had lower
tank mass, in proportion to contents, than the Atlas E did. (Some of the
other Atlas variants may have done better, but I don't have numbers for
them handy. Atlas tank-wall thickness got dialed up and down to suit the
application.) Mind you, the Titan stage benefitted from higher propellant
densities, and the S-IC from sheer scale.


There was a proposed S-IC stage and a half derivative, the S-ID. It
would drop the 4 outer engines (to be recovered) and was capable of
orbiting 22 tons.
I wonder if it would have had a lower cost than 2 stage EELVs.
The up side was retaining heavy lift capacity.
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/saturnvb.htm