|
|
|
|
 |
|
July 28th, 2005, 06:48 AM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,245
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Space Shuttle returns to flight
|
July 28th, 2005, 07:41 AM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 5,623
Thanks: 1
Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Space Shuttle returns to flight
That's too bad. But maybe it will help get the next generation of space craft out just a little bit faster...
|
July 28th, 2005, 07:36 PM
|
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 222
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Space Shuttle returns to flight
Imho there are two solutions for this problem, one might be possible with the current shuttle design but might be impossible due to physics, the second is for the next shuttle design.
First the maybe now possible one: why not install a protective jacket around the heatshield of the shuttle ? it doesnt need it when lifting off, only when coming down.
Second, make it so that in the next shuttle the fuel tanks and booster rockets are on the less vulnerable side, this should be the backside for the current space shuttle, or maybe even the sides.
both solutions however are quite expansive I think so it'll be for the next shuttle.
|
July 29th, 2005, 04:50 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 4,323
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Space Shuttle returns to flight
Quote:
boran_blok said:
Imho there are two solutions for this problem, one might be possible with the current shuttle design but might be impossible due to physics, the second is for the next shuttle design.
First the maybe now possible one: why not install a protective jacket around the heatshield of the shuttle ? it doesnt need it when lifting off, only when coming down.
Second, make it so that in the next shuttle the fuel tanks and booster rockets are on the less vulnerable side, this should be the backside for the current space shuttle, or maybe even the sides.
both solutions however are quite expansive I think so it'll be for the next shuttle.
|
For the 'next generation' they should finish the development of the system rather than leave it as a half-baked hack/kludge. You do know that the shuttle was supposed to have a flying 'lifter' to carry it (like the 747 transporter does but more gracefully) to 50,000 feet or so and then launch from there? The current system with the external tank and the boosters is a kludge because they couldn't get the money to complete the original design. That is the real problem. They are using the shuttle in a way it was not intended/designed for.
|
July 29th, 2005, 09:13 PM
|
 |
Major
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Searching for a holy grail.
Posts: 1,001
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: Space Shuttle returns to flight
That assumes they get a budget to do this. Bear in mind this isn't the amount of money they ask for, it's the amount they'll need.
Major engineering projects do not come in on-spec, on time and on budget. Ever. You might get one, maybe, if your lucky and the project isn't ambitious, you'll get two. But never all three.
__________________
He who disagrees with me in private, call him a fool. He who disagrees with me in public, call him an ambulance.
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|
