• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Shuttle Launch

LazersGoPEWPEW

LazersGoPEWPEW

4500rpm
Contributor
I think for me a rocket has more appeal because of the design of rockets. I look at the shuttle and I see ugly. I see a rocket and I see something similar to a bullet screaming through the sky. Shuttles just don't do it for me.

As for re-entry. I'd take dropping into the ocean over landing a shuttle any day of the week.
 
BACONATOR

BACONATOR

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
Mumbles said:
Geez.....that dosen't look any different from the Apollo modules. I guess form follows function again.
Click to expand...

Well apart from the completely new stabilization/computer/avionics systems that project Orion will boast over the old Apollo design, the old-school tube rocket-module design is FAR more mission-effective than its more modern shuttle counterpart, for many reasons (albeit not the coolness factor that Lazers describes above).
 
zoph

zoph

New Member
bogey_spotter said:
Well apart from the completely new stabilization/computer/avionics systems that project Orion will boast over the old Apollo design, the old-school tube rocket-module design is FAR more mission-effective than its more modern shuttle counterpart, for many reasons (albeit not the coolness factor that Lazers describes above).
Click to expand...

The design of the blunt body reentry vehicle is such that it is fairly stable in super-sonic flow, but usually becomes unstable when it slows down too much below M=1. They controlled the descent attitude of the Apollo CM during reentry by rotating the vehicle about its axis using reaction control thrusters (look at a photo of the CM, you'll see these at the top of it). By using a design where the CG of the CM was off center of the axis, rotating the vehicle would cause a tilt (AoA) and provide for a small amount of lift in a know direction, allowing for course corrections within the reentry corridor (coming in too fast = too hot/death, or too shallow = bouncing off the atmosphere/yeah death...Apollo 13...great movie).

The engineers are doing the same thing with the CM of the new Apollo thing..I keep forgetting its name..but they made changes to the shape of the reentry vehicle and had to do some wind tunnel tests in a big ass shock tube with Schlieren imaging to tweak the shape of the heat shield and get the shock wave sitting just right in order to make all this reentry stuff work. The computer models don't always cut it.

The ablative cooling stuff is neat too and it's not just use for reentry vehicles. You'll also find it in the thrust vector jet vanes of a lot of AA missiles like the Sidewinder and other stuff too...the prototype YF-23 was going to use this to cool portions of the body near the exhaust and reduce the IR signature of the aircraft.

...that's enough rambling for one night...if you're having troble getting to sleep, just read this post again. :sleep_125
 
FLYTPAY

FLYTPAY

Pro-Rec Fighter Pilot
pilot
None
LazersGoPEWPEW said:
I think for me a rocket has more appeal because of the design of rockets. I look at the shuttle and I see ugly. I see a rocket and I see something similar to a bullet screaming through the sky. Shuttles just don't do it for me.

As for re-entry. I'd take dropping into the ocean over landing a shuttle any day of the week.
Click to expand...

I think I would rather you drop into the ocean than attempt to land the shuttle:D
300px-Baker.jpg
 
Morgan81

Morgan81

It's not my lawn. It's OUR lawn.
pilot
Contributor
I'm a little late to this thread but I saw this documentary on Discovery HD a few weeks back and thought it was great. It addresses the case of landing humans on Mars in the very short term and breaking out of low Earth orbit and NASA's stagnation, as Dr. Zubrin puts it. I remember reading about a few of these projects when they first came out but never really understood the magnitude at the time.
Either way, give it a look if you can.
The Mars Underground
 
B

Blutonski816

Guest
Morgan81 said:
I'm a little late to this thread but I saw this documentary on Discovery HD a few weeks back and thought it was great. It addresses the case of landing humans on Mars in the very short term and breaking out of low Earth orbit and NASA's stagnation, as Dr. Zubrin puts it. I remember reading about a few of these projects when they first came out but never really understood the magnitude at the time.
Either way, give it a look if you can.
The Mars Underground
Click to expand...

I read his book The Case for Mars and as a middle school student was a big fan of the Mars Direct approach to sending manned missions to Mars. Good stuff but I agree that NASA is twiddling its thumbs at the idea of moving forward in not just human exploration but human evolution as a whole.
I'm also a big suscriber to the O'Neillian views of human colonization in space, but realistically stuff like that won't be around until man cowboys up massive VonBraunian scale space ventures in the private sector.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top