Article View: sci.space
Article #8190Re: Unmanned w/old SRBs (was Re: space news from July 11 AW&ST)
From: Bob Pendleton
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1988 19:56
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1988 19:56
24 lines
1546 bytes
1546 bytes
From article <484@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM>, by johnson@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM (Wayne D. T. Johnson):
- In article <1988Sep13.164340.1289@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
-> Oh, there is a difference,
->but given the oxidizer shortage, one has to balance the risks against the
->utility of being able to fly more missions.
-
- Forgive me for asking what might seem to be a dumb question (I'm not as involved
- with the space program as I once was), but why not remove the oxidizer from the
- old segments and put it into the new ones?
- --
Ever tried to take the egg out of an angel cake? The oxidizer is mixed
into the propellent and then the whole mass is "baked" to form a
solid. Not to mention that in this case the "cake" (solid rocket
propellent) has been known to catch fire and even explode when it is
cut.
Bob P.
--
Bob Pendleton @ Evans & Sutherland
UUCP Address: {decvax,ucbvax,allegra}!decwrl!esunix!bpendlet
Alternate: utah-cs!esunix!bpendlet
I am solely responsible for what I say.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<981@esunix.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mailrus!ames!lll-tis!oodis01!uplherc!esunix!bpendletReferences:
<484@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mailrus!ames!lll-tis!oodis01!uplherc!esunix!bpendlet From: bpendlet@esunix.UUCP (Bob Pendleton) Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: Unmanned w/old SRBs (was Re: space news from July 11 AW&ST) Message-ID: <981@esunix.UUCP> Date: 26 Sep 88 19:56:44 GMT References: <484@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM> Organization: Evans & Sutherland, Salt Lake City, Utah Lines: 24