Article View: sci.space
Article #6614Re: SSTO vs 2 stage
From: Paul Dietz
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:00
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:00
19 lines
1199 bytes
1199 bytes
In article <ewright.725734633@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes: >> There's a very good argument for multistage rockets - it makes the mass >> ratio much simpler to manage (see some of the books by Willy Ley). > There's also a very good argument for multistage airplanes -- it makes > the mass ratio simpler to manage. The mass ratio on an airliner is much less than in a launcher with chemical rocket propulsion, for rather fundamental reasons. It is therefore not inconceivable that multistage launchers would be appropriate even though multistage aircraft are not. (Actually, effectively multistage aircraft are in routine use, through the use of midair refueling.) Paul F. Dietz dietz@cs.rochester.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Dec30.180058.28938@cs.rochester.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!udel!rochester!dietzReferences:
<C025yp.A1.1@cs.cmu.edu> <ewright.725734633@convex.convex.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.space Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!udel!rochester!dietz From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) Subject: Re: SSTO vs 2 stage Message-ID: <1992Dec30.180058.28938@cs.rochester.edu> Organization: University of Rochester References: <C025yp.A1.1@cs.cmu.edu> <ewright.725734633@convex.convex.com> Distribution: sci Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:00:58 GMT Lines: 19