New Shuttle-derived booster squabbles

On 13/05/2011 4:24 PM, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 5/12/2011 5:49 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:

There I was thinking that using solid fuel rockets for manned launches
had been killed off to avoid killing off the astronauts.

And using in throw-away mode three engines designed for re-use...

They're intending to use the large number of retired Shuttle engines
they have on hand.

Retired in the sense of built but having missions left in their life, or
retired in the sense of the life expired, but safe enough, in a
manager's mind, for one more flight?

At least if they do a manned version with a capsule on it, it well have
a launch escape system on it, unlike the Shuttle.

Pat

Though with the potential of having to cope with a rain of burning solid
rocket fuel.

Sylvia.

On May 13, 5:02*am, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 13/05/2011 4:24 PM, Pat Flannery wrote:

On 5/12/2011 5:49 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:

There I was thinking that using solid fuel rockets for manned launches
had been killed off to avoid killing off the astronauts.

And using in throw-away mode three engines designed for re-use...

They're intending to use the large number of retired Shuttle engines
they have on hand.

Retired in the sense of built but having missions left in their life, or
retired in the sense of the life expired, but safe enough, in a
manager's mind, for one more flight?

At least if they do a manned version with a capsule on it, it well have
a launch escape system on it, unlike the Shuttle.

Pat

Though with the potential of having to cope with a rain of burning solid
rocket fuel.

Sylvia.

and shaking the payload bad. solids arent a good choice for manned
operations on so many levels.......

On 5/13/2011 1:02 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
They're intending to use the large number of retired Shuttle engines
they have on hand.

Retired in the sense of built but having missions left in their life, or
retired in the sense of the life expired, but safe enough, in a
manager's mind, for one more flight?

Both and then some; the later engines had higher performance than the
first ones built; they never did get near the total number of times they
could be reflown before needing replacement that were promised in the
original specs.
The idea on Ares V was that they would carry only cargo to orbit, and
not a crewed capsule, therefor if something did go wrong with them, you
wouldn't lose people.


At least if they do a manned version with a capsule on it, it well have
a launch escape system on it, unlike the Shuttle.

Pat

Though with the potential of having to cope with a rain of burning solid
rocket fuel.


Needs an escape system that shoots it sideways as well as up, and a
parachute system that opens at the peak of its flight, so that the
capsule descends slower than the falling burning fuel from the faulty SRB.

Pat