![]() |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Anyone happen to know why the Ruskies decided not to go with an
aerospike, by tapping off some of the oxygen from the ring of engines and dumping it into the base region or something. I would have expected that they would have got good performance gains from raising the base pressure. But I read somewhere they thought they could get ~350 seconds that way and get 10% more payload, but they still didn't think it was worth it??? (But others said they got no more performance at all... and that they seemed to be under target payload... the reports seem to vary wildly.) Anyone got a good story about it? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rusty's Reading Room -- q | snidely | History | 2 | February 2nd 06 03:08 AM |
RS-68 Aerospike | Mike Dennis | Space Shuttle | 5 | July 5th 05 03:55 AM |
First propulsive aerospike flight? | Allen Thomson | Policy | 9 | April 21st 04 07:03 PM |
Student/industry team launches 1st liquid fueled aerospike rocket | Clark S. Lindsey | Technology | 3 | September 25th 03 08:43 PM |
Aerospike refit | Chuck Stewart | Space Shuttle | 1 | August 12th 03 11:41 PM |