Article View: sci.space
Article #6587Re: SSTO vs. 2 Stage
From: Greg Moore
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 03:36
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 03:36
51 lines
2718 bytes
2718 bytes
In article <ewright.725658384@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes: >In <18892@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn) writes: > >> We have been launching staged rockets for nearly half a century. I >>think the problems of staging, if not trivial, are solvable. Certainly, >>historical evidence indicates that staging is less of a technical challenge >>than SSTO operation. > >Bingo! > >Okay, now we've gotten to the crux of the problem. > Ayup, we have. You want people either to lead, follow or get out of the way. Yet, when someone suggests a technique that MAY give a five-fold increase in lbs to orbit, you immediately jump down their throat. Si I guess leading is not there, so I guess that leaves, Following or getting out of your way. >You simply do not understand the difference between a converted >artillery rocket, which we have been launching for nearly half >a century, and a single-stage-to-orbit *spaceship*. > >Saying that launch vehicles should be multistaged like ICBMs >makes as much sense as saying that airplanes should be shaped >like cannonballs. > I don't know about cannonballs, but artillery shells and airplanes tend to have similar shapes in their bodies. But, your analogy is only half meritted. The reason DC-1 may be a lot less expensive is due to a LOT of factors, only one of which is related to staging costs. And, if you approach the problem of staging the same way DC-X is approaching some other problems, you MAY find that it can be done cheap enough to merit the work. If you don't, hey, they you go on. Not every idea for a DC-1 follow-on will work. Some will, some won't. Let's give it some time and find out what our needs are. Perhaps we find for whatever reason that 90% of our payload to orbit is about the right size for DC-1, and the remaining 10% needs a lift capacity of 8 times DC-1. Well, in that case, economics dictates that a DC-0 WOn't work. But ther may be economic scenarious where it does work. The biggest objection I have to DC-0 right now, is that I don't see a market for it. That may change. It depends on if cheaper access to space prompts people to launch bigger payloads, or more smaller ones. > > >
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<qf22l5c@rpi.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!rpi!clotho.acm.rpi.edu!striderReferences:
<18892@mindlink.bc.ca> <ewright.725658384@convex.convex.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.space Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!rpi!clotho.acm.rpi.edu!strider From: strider@clotho.acm.rpi.edu (Greg Moore) Subject: Re: SSTO vs. 2 Stage Message-ID: <qf22l5c@rpi.edu> Nntp-Posting-Host: acm.rpi.edu Organization: The Voice of Fate References: <18892@mindlink.bc.ca> <ewright.725658384@convex.convex.com> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 03:36:34 GMT Lines: 53