![]() |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I found it interesting, though maybe not totally surprising, to read in a recent AvLeak that the Capsule was something like 3,000 lbs over weight targets, and that the booster was near it's maximum thrust as well, which was leading to all sorta of tricks and changes to cut the capsule weight down. One was to re-do the entire interstage (sorry, don't have the article near me to put down the right terms...) thrust structure which holds the OMS and solar panels and other equipment in an effort to reduce weight. To me, it sounded like they were doing a ****-poor job of initial estimation, and hadn't budgetted for any growth outside their control. Which seems ludicrious since the Apollo program had exactly the same problems and von Braun quietly upped the numbers of the apollo launchers to address this exact issue. Is the problem today that they're talking too closely to each other early on? Or that they're believing each other too much and not padding the initial numbers enough? Basically, were the capsule people saying "Yeah, we can do it all with a mass budget of 10,000lbs max" and the launcher people said "Yeah, we can give you 10,000lbs max" and they both started AT 10,000 (number grabbed out of thin air)? Should the launcher people had said "Sure you want 10,000 max, we'll build for 15,000 since we know you'll go over." Or "Sure you'll get 10,000 no problem. Quickly guys, let's plan for 15,000 but not tell anyone..." Or how do you budget properly for weight growth? I read about jet engines for the A380 and B787 which are supposed to be comming in around 80,000lbs each, but that GE/Rolls/Pratt have actually run them at 86,000 already, even though they'll be rated lower. How hard would it be to just build in a margin and hope to never use it? Or is the design so damm tight, and the perception of "If we don't use every last pound of thrust available to launch every last ounce of mass we can use, we're wasting money?" I dunno... I just don't have a good feeling about CEV and Ares I at all. John |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fast Spin=Weight Fast acceleration=Weight Motion=Gravity etc. | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 0 | December 11th 06 11:45 AM |
CHILD GROWTH = HUBBLE EXPANSION | George Hammond | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 9th 06 01:25 AM |
CHILD GROWTH = HUBBLE EXPANSION | George Hammond | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 8th 06 12:02 PM |
Upper limit placed on star growth | Stephen Tonkin | UK Astronomy | 0 | March 10th 05 08:50 AM |
Mars - Spherule Growth Up Close | Thomas Lee Elifritz | Policy | 0 | March 5th 04 01:37 AM |