CEV development cost rumbles

On or about 04 Mar 2004 13:42:46 GMT, Jorge R. Frank
made the sensational claim that:
This is similar to what Gen. Deal proposed in CAIB appendix D: a layer of
ablative in between the crew cabin and the forward fuselage shell. The
concept has some challenges. One, it makes the orbiter even more nose-heavy
than it already is. This is bad because the orbiter CG has to be in a
fairly small "box" in order for the flight control system to work (this is
a problem with many shuttle escape-system concepts, BTW). Two, there's lots
of wiring running in the gap between the fuselage and the cabin, and adding
ablative would make that wiring much less accessible for inspection/repair.
Aging Kapton wiring is a major safety concern for the fleet now. So this is
not an unmitigated win for safety.

Of course, you're talking about an OV-200 design while Deal was talking
about the existing orbiters.

Would you need an ablative in a Columbia type situation? I imagine other
improvements would mitagate such a repitition anyway. My major concern with
this approach is how to get the astros out in a semi-sane manner, i.e. I can't
imagine them crawling around in a falling, probably damaged cabin. I've got
visions of the entire aft bulkhead just going bye bye, but how do you ensure
that in a situation of the type we're talking about here? I'm not smart enough
to figure that one out, and I'm sure you're still going to be wanting to beef
up the suits to handle any debris in the area. But this is exactly the reason
I believe a 200 series is almost necessary. There are definately things which
could be fixed in a new build that can't be patched into an existing vehicle.
--
This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | Just because something
It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | is possible, doesn't
No person, none, care | and it will reach me | mean it can happen