![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
.. . Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote: When it came time to design the Shuttle, NASA wasn't about to paint itself into that corner, so it was _going_ to require people to fly it come hell or high water. You're putting the cart before the horse. Of course the Shuttle was going to have people on it. That was sort of the point. Once you accept that design requirement, you discard the need to make it entirely autonomous. Although it would have been interesting to make it totally autonomous for simple satellite boost missions (Buran was going to have the ability to fly unmanned operational missions if so desired), Perhaps, but then again, you're losing what was in theory a valuable attribute of the system, the ability to intervene while on-orbit if a problem does come up. An ability used more than once. I was thinking along the lines of just flying it unmanned for the first orbital test or so for safety's sake, like the intention was for Dyna-Soar, another system intended to be always manned when operational.* The Air Force thought that was doable by November, 1965; it should have been doable fifteen years later. Thinking and doing are two different things. *Although it might have occurred to them that if they did give it the ability to fly unmanned missions, its time on-orbit could be greatly extended, and you would end up with something along the lines of the X-37B decades sooner. For what purpose though? Pat -- Greg Moore Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
*Although it might have occurred to them that if they did give it the ability to fly unmanned missions, its time on-orbit could be greatly extended, and you would end up with something along the lines of the X-37B decades sooner. For what purpose though? Way back when the program got started, Dyna-Soar was to carry a atomic weapon around in it to bomb Russia after flying a skip-glide trajectory over the north pole; that concept got dropped with the successful arrival of the ICBM, but that was the origin of the program. An unmanned version could have been launched into orbit in times of crisis and commanded to descend from orbit to attack the USSR while maneuvering to evade ABMs. If unneeded, it could reenter and land for future reuse. One other thing you could envision it doing unmanned is flying a automated reconnaissance mission over a period of a month or so and then bringing all the film back, as it would have been in the time frame where physical film return was still done. What really worked against Dyna-Soar was the need to use a Titan III or Saturn I booster to get it into orbit; that is getting awfully expensive to do on any sort of regular basis. Pat |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA 2011 budget and Ares-1 | Pat Flannery | Policy | 123 | February 28th 10 06:51 PM |
NASA 2011 budget and Ares-1 | Peter Stickney[_2_] | History | 0 | January 30th 10 10:16 PM |
NASA 2011 budget and Ares-1 | Brian Thorn[_2_] | History | 2 | January 30th 10 06:06 AM |
NASA 2011 budget and Ares-1 | Derek Lyons | History | 0 | January 29th 10 09:45 PM |