A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Application of trans-stage for a recoverable rocket?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 27th 14, 12:25 AM posted to sci.space.tech
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Application of trans-stage for a recoverable rocket?

This newsgroup has been moribund to say the least.
So thought I'd prime the pump a bit.

SpaceX's approach to the recoverable rocket problem is an interesting
one, I'm curious to know what work has been done in this area by others.

Specifically, I'm curious to know if any work was ever done in the area
of providing a trans-stage, or coupler stage to provide a recovery option.

In this scenario, a smaller trans-stage is attached to the top of the
first stage with tank-age and engine(s) sufficient to safely bring down
the empty first stage booster. The second stage is attached atop the
trans-stage and separates normally as expected during ascent. The rocket
configuration of the trans-stage would be set up with the engine nozzles
configured to fire down and to the sides of the trans-stage. To reduce
drag the nozzles would be encased in fairings that protrude smoothly
from the side of the stage. The trans-stage does not separate from the
first stage.

There are a couple of advantages to this approach:

1) The entire propellant load of the first stages could be used for ascent.

2) Simplification of the recovery effort of a multi-booster
configuration such as the Falcon-9 Heavy. Instead of having to manage
the recovery of three separate boosters, you only need deploy landing
legs on the three and have a single point-of-control for the active
recovery. This assumes that the trans-stage can provide enough thrust to
recover three empty boosters.

There has been some discussion in other web forums about the long term
practicality of a reusable F9H vs a reusable BFR I suppose something
akin to the Falcon XX. Having a trans-stage provide the recovery thrust
would alleviate some of the complexity pointed out in #2 above.

Among the disadvantages would be the added weight and fuel of the
trans-stage, which would reduce the over-all performance and it would
not likely yield an advantage over a fly-back single booster rocket like
the F9. Unless perhaps the propellant/engine combination were different
i.e. more efficient/lighter than what is used in the first stage booster
itself.

Aerodynamic stability would be another issue, since at least right at
staging the weight distribution might make the first-stage "top heavy".
Would rocket power alone be enough to compensate for this?

It would be really fascinating to know if SpaceX considered this as an
option and if so what reasons convinced them this was not a way to go.

Dave

 




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
NASA's New Upper Stage Rocket Engine Ready For Testing (J-2X) Rick Jones Policy 10 June 17th 11 06:43 PM
Altitude record for a single stage rocket [email protected] History 23 June 5th 08 04:54 AM
Shuttle C with recoverable engines? [email protected] Space Shuttle 11 December 31st 07 01:05 AM
BOINC typo "Desktop Grid" -- 'Application' -- 'Search 1.01' should read 'Search 1.1' in line with the application version number... Max Power SETI 0 January 14th 06 02:31 AM
More details on the Indian recoverable satellite plan Jim Oberg Policy 12 August 28th 05 04:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:18 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.