![]() |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article et,
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote: Any reason why the foam cannot be *inside* the fuel tank? Because if anything came off, for any reason, it would go into the SSME? I suspect that could spoil your whole day. Liquid oxygen soaked into an organic material is an explosive. So any internal insulation in the oxygen tank would have to be non-organic. In principle, you could immerse the LO2 tank in the LH2 tank, and insulate the outside of the LO2 tank. You know, that's an idea I don't think I've seen before. It's interesting if nothing else. Without insulation between the tanks LH2 would still boil off, oxygen would freeze to the LH2 tank wall, and chunks of it could be shed into the pumps. This also would be bad. The right answers for reliability are, use a vehicle arrangement which is not susceptible to its own detritus, and use a vehicle which is entirely re-useable and therefore testable. For lower overall costs one would also not use LH2. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA Finishes Redesigned Shuttle Fuel Tank | Jim deGriz | Space Shuttle | 0 | December 28th 04 11:33 PM |
STS-87 Foam Impact Assessment (reposted) | Stuf4 | Space Shuttle | 11 | September 29th 03 02:24 PM |
STS-87 Foam Impact Assessment (reposted) | Stuf4 | Policy | 8 | September 29th 03 02:23 PM |
STS-87 Foam Impact Assessment (reposted) | Stuf4 | History | 8 | September 29th 03 02:23 PM |
MEDS Created "Window of Vulnerability" Safety Risk | Stuf4 | Space Shuttle | 9 | September 27th 03 02:08 AM |