Article View: sci.space
Article #6705Re: SSTO vs 2 stage
From: Bruce Dunn
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:54
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:54
20 lines
1290 bytes
1290 bytes
Regarding my assumption that SSTO proposals based on the Saturn S-IVB would
be non returnable and non-reusable, Henry Spencer writes:
>
> No, some of the S-IVB-based SSTO proposals were reusable. I don't know
> how well they would have worked, and I don't know that I'd plan a spaceline
> based on them without waiting a while to see how reusable they really were,
> but on paper it was feasible.
I stand corrected, although somewhat puzzled. If you have the details
handy Henry, could you inform us how it was planned to recover a cylindrical
stage without having it break up the way the Shuttle ET breaks up when it
hits the atmosphere? Presumably this must involve some mechanism for keeping
the stage oriented and tumble free during re-entry. What heat shield
materials were planned in this era prior to the Shuttle tiles and blankets?
--
Bruce Dunn Vancouver, Canada Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<19069@mindlink.bc.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!rsoft!mindlink!a752Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.space Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!rsoft!mindlink!a752 From: Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn) Subject: Re: SSTO vs 2 stage Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:54:55 GMT Message-ID: <19069@mindlink.bc.ca> Sender: news@deep.rsoft.bc.ca (Usenet) Lines: 20