FAQ-2-B: sci.space.tech reading list

References:

Whoo hoo, another update, based on part of the feedback (don't
worry, I'm not ignoring HGH's comments, etc).

Reading lists and recommended references are a recurrent theme in
sci.space.* This occurs so often that it seems like there is a FAQ
missing here.

This prototype for a FAQ is being offered by a non-expert (pure
wannabe, as I haven't even made it through my Baker and Makemson), but
it's based on recommendations made in various sci.space.* threads.

This list includes a couple of "space history" books because they have
useful overviews, but focuses mainly on technical references and
theory works. (Jenkins, *Space Shuttle*, kinda falls into both
groups, I gather). This is the reading list for those who are going
to design the X-Prize OSP-replacement. Er, that is, those who want to
know numbers, check models, and do BOTE calculations for any kind of
spaceflight, manned, robotic, reentering or interstellar. I've also
included Tuftes so that you can communicate usefully about your
findings and results.

Most of the "space history" books should be, I think, in a seperate
FAQ, and I may get around to drafting that one of these days. But why
wait for that when you can chew this rag? (I've started, but...)

Because various local experts have various favorites (and decry
certain other selections), I thought it would be useful to include
information on who recommended the book, or who suggests *not* using
it -- thus the Votes For and Votes Against portion of the entries.

This is still an early second draft. I am will do a at least a couple more
drafts, but anyone who wants to take over long term stewardship should be
named Keeper of the FAQ. The format used here is a temporary one; it
should be done in html-compatible citation format, but that's a later
step.

Note that I've left out most publication data for now. I have access
to some of that information already (I saved the list from one of the
schools that was posted a bit ago), but I won't spit in your face if
you send me reminders about that. And there are some references so
familiar that no one bothers to post the whole identification, and
I've missed some of those because I haven't sipped from that cup yet.

Note: "name-hearsay" in a vote means that "name" knows of the source,
but has not reviewed it directly.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: NASA
T: Introduction to the Aerodynamics of Flight, NASA SP-367
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: shafer, berndt
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Murray and Cox
T:
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: kevinw
Votes Against: om
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Wiesel
T:
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: JRF
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Bate, Mueller, and White
T:
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: JRF
Votes Against: spencer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Prussing and Conway
T:
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: JRF-hearsay, spencer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Eckart
T: Lunar Base Handbook
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: Cate
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Lewis et al
T: Resources of Near-Earth Space
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: Spencer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Larson and Pranke
T: Human Spaceflight - mission analysis and design
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: Cate
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: US Air Force
T: Space Planners Guide
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: Cate
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Ogata
T: SYSTEM DYNAMICS
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: sstezel
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Ogata
T: MODERN CONTROL ENGINEERING
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: sstezel
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Anderson
T: Modern Compressible Flow
P: [publication data TBD] (0072424435)
Votes For:
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Anderson, John D/
T: Hypersonic and High Temperature Gas Dynamics
P: McGraw-Hill Companies, The; 1989; ISBN 0-07-001671-2
Votes For: Higgins
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Ely
T: Return from Space
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Loh
T: Re-entry and Planetary Entry Physics and Technology - I,II
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: cate
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Hill & Peterson
T: Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Propulsion
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: sstezel
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Hyder et al
T: Spacecraft Power Technologies
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: chrisw
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Turner
T: Rocket and spacecraft propulsion
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer (1/2 or better)
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Sutton
T: Rocket Propulsion Elements
P: [publication data TBD] now in its 7th edition
Votes For: spencer
Votes Against:
N: with a new co-author whose name is to be recalled
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Tajmar
T: Advanced Space Propulsion Systems
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: --
Votes Against: chrisw
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Constantine & Cain
T: Hydrogen Peroxide Handbook
P: [publication data TBD] (R-6931, AD819081)
Votes For: lowther
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Parker
T: Materials for missiles and spacecraft
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Van Dyke
T: An Album of Fluid Motion
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: shafer, kaszeta, shoppa, higgins
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Pope
T: Aerodynamics of Supersonic Flow, 2nd ed (1958)
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Ashkenas, McRuer, and Graham
T: Flight Control Systems
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: shafer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Vallado
T: Fundamentals of Astrodynamics and Applications 2nd ed
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Szebehely (2nd ed w/Mark)
T: Adventures In Celestial Mechanics ISBN 0-292-75105-2
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: ingram, winter
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Baker & Makemson
T: An Introduction to Astrodynamics
P: [publication data TBD] (USAF, approx 1961)
Votes For:
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Wertz
T: Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer-hearsay
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Misner, Thorne, Wheeler
T: GRAVITATION
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: mook
Votes Against: spencer, cate
N: spencer this is not really a space-technology book.
A few ultra-precise applications, like long-term high-precision modeling
of interplanetary trajectories and asteroid orbits, have to consider
relativistic effects. But for most practical purposes, Newtonian gravity
is just fine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: ---
T: The Standard Handbook for Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineers
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: cate
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Jenkins and Landis
T: Hypersonic
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer, shafer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Jenkins
T: Space Shuttle
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: who doesn't?
Votes Against:
N: Combination technical reference and program history
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Cooper
T: Before Lift-Off
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Schmitt
T: US Manned Spaceflight in the 20th Century
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: cfink, berndt
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Tufte
T: The Visual Display of Quantitative Information
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: kevinw, shafer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Tufte
T: Envisioning Information
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: shafer, kevinw
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Tufte
T: Visual Explanations
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: shafer, kevinw
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Huzel and Huang
T: Modern Engineering for Design of Liquid-Propellant Rocket Engines
P: Fourth printing, 1992, AIAA
Votes For: iain
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: ---
T: NASA SP-8112, "Pressurization systems for liquid rockets",
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer
Votes Against:
N: spencer It *is* more of a survey[than Huzel & Huang].
It'savailable (as a scanned PDF) on the net. (As are almost all of the
NASA 8000-series SPs, many of which are fascinating reading for rocket designers.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Clark
T: Ignition!
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: spencer
Votes Against:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rev: 20040518

dave schneider wrote:

A: Bate, Mueller, and White
T:
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: JRF
Votes Against: spencer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A: Prussing and Conway
T:
P: [publication data TBD]
Votes For: JRF-hearsay, spencer
Votes Against:

I got the Bate, Mueller and White book for $10 (IIRC). At Amazon the
Prussing book was $70 (also IIRC). While at a university library I
glanced through Prussing & Conway's book and it seemed to cover much the
same material as BMW. Some of the explanations and diagrams seemed very
similar.

But Henry's opinions are usually based on sound arguments. I am hoping
he'll tell what he didn't like about BMW and how the Prussing Conway
book was better.



--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

In article ,
Hop David wrote:
I got the Bate, Mueller and White book for $10 (IIRC). At Amazon the
Prussing book was $70 (also IIRC).

The one real virtue of BMW is that it's cheap.

But Henry's opinions are usually based on sound arguments. I am hoping
he'll tell what he didn't like about BMW and how the Prussing Conway
book was better.

BMW covers all the topics the USAF Academy thought were worth covering in
1970. And nothing else. Basics of orbits, okay, and some interesting
stuff on lunar trajectories (Apollo was flying then). Close to half the
book is spent on orbit determination, which is particularly wasteful
because there is good specialist coverage of that topic elsewhere. And
then there's the chapter on ballistic-missile trajectories, whee.

Essentially nothing on rendezvous, or relative motion in general. Nothing
on multi-body dynamics. Almost nothing on perturbations. The stuff on
numerical methods can be described politely as "dated". Half a page on
geostationary orbit. No bielliptic or other generalized transfers, no
gravity assists. Almost nothing on time and coordinate systems, a nasty
swamp but important.

I have my complaints about P&C -- mainly, that I'd like to see it bigger
to cover more topics -- but it's a much more modern and balanced treatment.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. |

Since my name (or at least my initials) is being invoked in defense of BMW,
I feel compelled to jump in and clarify here...

(Henry Spencer) wrote in
:

In article ,
Hop David wrote:
I got the Bate, Mueller and White book for $10 (IIRC). At Amazon the
Prussing book was $70 (also IIRC).

The one real virtue of BMW is that it's cheap.

And readily available. You can walk into most large (B&N, Borders)
bookstores and browse through BMW on the shelves and decide whether you
want it. The other books you recommend are academic texts, available online
but not so readily available if you just want to leaf through one.

But Henry's opinions are usually based on sound arguments. I am hoping
he'll tell what he didn't like about BMW and how the Prussing Conway
book was better.

BMW covers all the topics the USAF Academy thought were worth covering
in 1970. And nothing else. Basics of orbits, okay, and some
interesting stuff on lunar trajectories (Apollo was flying then).
Close to half the book is spent on orbit determination, which is
particularly wasteful because there is good specialist coverage of
that topic elsewhere. And then there's the chapter on
ballistic-missile trajectories, whee.

Agreed on the technical merits. But let's say you take out the stuff on
orbit determination and ballistic missiles. You're still left with a decent
intro to the basics: Kepler's laws, Newton's laws, orbit elements, basic
maneuvers, the LEO environment, and the aforementioned lunar/planetary
trajectories. That's not bad for $11.17 (the price at Amazon).

Essentially nothing on rendezvous, or relative motion in general.
Nothing on multi-body dynamics. Almost nothing on perturbations. The
stuff on numerical methods can be described politely as "dated". Half
a page on geostationary orbit. No bielliptic or other generalized
transfers, no gravity assists. Almost nothing on time and coordinate
systems, a nasty swamp but important.

I have my complaints about P&C -- mainly, that I'd like to see it
bigger to cover more topics -- but it's a much more modern and
balanced treatment.

Agreed again. No question that I'd recommend P&C over BMW for an academic
environment, or to any serious student of the subject. But at $64.95, it's
not an investment to be taken lightly, either. For a layman who just wants
to learn the basics, BMW is just fine.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

Henry Spencer wrote:

Essentially nothing on rendezvous, or relative motion in general. Nothing
on multi-body dynamics. Almost nothing on perturbations. The stuff on
numerical methods can be described politely as "dated". Half a page on
geostationary orbit. No bielliptic or other generalized transfers, no
gravity assists.

Hmmm. Perturbations and gravity assists seem to be increasingly
important in scenarios I'm playing with.

Bielliptic meaning a transfer from one elliptical orbit to another
elliptical orbit? That's something else I hunger to study. You've
persuaded me. I'll get Prussing and Conway's book.

Almost nothing on time and coordinate systems, a nasty
swamp but important.

I disliked BMW's use of miles etc. as I've been making a conscious
effort to think metric.

Time and coordinate systems have been giving me headaches. I switch
between kilometers & seconds from A.U. and years. When I tried to find
out how many seconds in a year I was dismayed to find there are many
different units all called a "year". I've been using Julian years but am
still not sure that's the best unit.

--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

"Vincent Cate" wrote in message
om...
T: Thrust Into Space

I think this is one of the best space.tech books ever.

Second the nomination.
Votes For: cate, menegay

Incidentally, Vince, is your spacetethers Yahoo group dead?
I posted to it a month ago and have seen no response.

(Henry Spencer) wrote:
[good feedback]

Thanks! I may make the last line part of the entry.

/dps

(Vincent Cate) wrote:
T: Thrust Into Space
A: Maxwell W. Hunter, II
P: 1966
Votes For: cate
Pages: 224
Copyright: Holt, Rinehard and Winston, Inc - http://www.hrw.com/

I think this is one of the best space.tech books ever.
It is an amazing collection of important space.tech info.
It is very clear and willing to venture opinions. Even
38 years later, it does not seem out of date.

Thanks! I would have missed this one....

/dps

Hop David wrote in
:

Henry Spencer wrote:

Essentially nothing on rendezvous, or relative motion in general.
Nothing on multi-body dynamics. Almost nothing on perturbations.
The stuff on numerical methods can be described politely as "dated".
Half a page on geostationary orbit. No bielliptic or other
generalized transfers, no gravity assists.

Hmmm. Perturbations and gravity assists seem to be increasingly
important in scenarios I'm playing with.

Bielliptic meaning a transfer from one elliptical orbit to another
elliptical orbit? That's something else I hunger to study.

Not quite. A bielliptic transfer is a transfer between two circular orbits
using two elliptical transfer orbits (and three burns), rather than the
single elliptical transfer (and two burns) used by the Hohmann transfer.
The first burn boosts apogee much higher than either the initial or final
orbits. The second burn, at apogee, changes perigee to the final orbit. The
third burn, at the new perigee, circularizes at the final orbit.

Somewhat counterintuitively, the bielliptic transfer can be more
propellant-efficient than the Hohmann transfer if the ratio between the
initial and final orbit heights is high enough (normally LEO to GEO isn't
enough). It can be especially efficient if there is a large plane change
involved. It has the disadvantage of requiring much more transfer time.


--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

dave schneider wrote:
(Vincent Cate) wrote:

T: Thrust Into Space
A: Maxwell W. Hunter, II
P: 1966
Votes For: cate
Pages: 224
Copyright: Holt, Rinehard and Winston, Inc - http://www.hrw.com/

I think this is one of the best space.tech books ever.
It is an amazing collection of important space.tech info.
It is very clear and willing to venture opinions. Even
38 years later, it does not seem out of date.


Thanks! I would have missed this one....

/dps

Dave, can you give a pointer to your faq?

--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html