A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The 100/10/1 Rule.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #14  
Old March 26th 07, 03:42 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,sci.space.shuttle
Mr Jim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default fun with expendable SSTOs (was The 100/10/1 Rule.)

"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...

... Very light tanks, probably pressure-stiffened like the old Atlas.


Does this choice place too many burdens & costs on ground handling and
checkout facilities/personnel? From my readings it appears the classic Atlas
folks had to throw plenty of $ at the problems to solve them (granted they
had completely different requirements, what with the operational USAF silo
basing, for the missles). Von Braun's folks reportedly hated the
pressure-stabilized approach, apparently judging it just couldn't fit with
their culture of protracted stacked checkout. It seems the latest Ariane
model requires pressure stabilization in the cyrogenic stage's LH2 tank even
during handling, which I thought was pretty interesting. Would you chose
steel, like Atlas, or Aluminum alloy?

... Boost pumps at the bottom of the tanks, or possibly the
bottom of the feed lines...


How are such pumps driven? Do they have their own turbines or can the engine
pumps drive them via shafts/gearboxes?

... One interesting option is to make the

boost pumps jet pumps, recirculating a bit of the output from the main
pumps to the jets in the boost pumps. (That too has been done.) ...

By "jet pump" do you mean something like a water-driven eductor pump? I've
used those for dewatering bilges and compartments on naval vessels and it's
pretty cool how fast such a simple rig can pump water. Is it bad to have yet
more high-velocity/high-pressure fluid piping running between pairs of
pumps? Seems like asking for trouble, what with all the vibration and flow
you're already having to cope with...

Finally, for engines, I'm partial to the idea of an aerospike with a ring
of small individual chambers. The small chambers help keep the scale of
most engine-development facilities down. The aerospike provides altitude
compensation and also permits a light, compact nozzle with a very high
expansion ratio in vacuum.


Henry, do aerospike engines have to be carefully integrated with the
particular airframe? If so, is that a problem? Would such an engine use
differential throttling to control pitch and yaw? How about roll control
during boost? Wouldn't your engine layout lend itself to a tripropellant
arrangement? That is, set up some chambers to burn LOX/LH2, start them at
the appropriate time (ground?) and draw from an LH2 tank up on top of the
stack (sorry to stretch out your nice high-bending resistance airframe and
weigh it down w/vacumn-jacketed LH2 lines...). The propane tank would be
smaller, but the LOX tank might have to get bigger. Shut down the LOX/Prop
chambers when the Propane's gone and press on to orbit. I know you don't
like that fluffy LH2 but I couldn't resist ... :-D

J


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The 100/10/1 Rule. kT Space Shuttle 156 March 28th 07 03:25 AM
Going Forth to Rule the World Warhol Misc 0 May 22nd 06 05:19 PM
Is this like some kind of rule? Rich Amateur Astronomy 7 January 16th 06 01:59 PM
Republicans Rule Mark Misc 5 May 28th 04 12:56 PM
Does Religion Rule ? G=EMC^2 Glazier Misc 2 March 4th 04 12:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.