|
Posted by DarkD on September 20, 2005, 5:41 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Ignoring cost factors can this been done, assuming a 5 Tonne payload? I am
guessing the only real restriction is the weight of the fuel. How much more
fuel would this require than the current shuttle? I am guessing it would be
over 1,000 times more.
|
|
Posted by Jeff Findley on September 20, 2005, 10:57 am
Please log in for more thread options
show/hide quoted text
> Ignoring cost factors can this been done, assuming a 5 Tonne payload? I am
> guessing the only real restriction is the weight of the fuel. How much
more
show/hide quoted text
> fuel would this require than the current shuttle? I am guessing it would
be
show/hide quoted text
> over 1,000 times more.
Stop guessing and do some research. A fully reusable TSTO ought to be
doable for far less than three orders of magnitude bigger than the shuttle!
For starters, take a look at what Space-X is planning on doing with reusable
first stages.
Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.
|
|
Posted by DarkD on September 21, 2005, 10:10 pm
Please log in for more thread options
show/hide quoted text
> > Ignoring cost factors can this been done, assuming a 5 Tonne payload? I
am
show/hide quoted text
> > guessing the only real restriction is the weight of the fuel. How much
> more
> > fuel would this require than the current shuttle? I am guessing it would
> be
> > over 1,000 times more.
> Stop guessing and do some research. A fully reusable TSTO ought to be
> doable for far less than three orders of magnitude bigger than the
shuttle!
show/hide quoted text
> For starters, take a look at what Space-X is planning on doing with
reusable
show/hide quoted text
> first stages.
I was only looking for a rough guestimate, chill out, hope I didn't take up
to much of your valuable trolling time.
|
|
Posted by Mike Dennis on September 22, 2005, 2:27 am
Please log in for more thread options show/hide quoted text
>> > Ignoring cost factors can this been done, assuming a 5 Tonne payload? I
> am
>> > guessing the only real restriction is the weight of the fuel. How much
>> more
>> > fuel would this require than the current shuttle? I am guessing it
>> > would
>> be
>> > over 1,000 times more.
>> Stop guessing and do some research. A fully reusable TSTO ought to be
>> doable for far less than three orders of magnitude bigger than the
> shuttle!
>> For starters, take a look at what Space-X is planning on doing with
> reusable
>> first stages.
> I was only looking for a rough guestimate, chill out, hope I didn't take
> up
> to much of your valuable trolling time.
Don't worry about it. He doesn't have time to be nice because he's busy
trying to figure out the difference between real spaceships and pretty
pictures.
|
|
Posted by Jeff Findley on September 22, 2005, 11:43 am
Please log in for more thread options
show/hide quoted text
> >> For starters, take a look at what Space-X is planning on doing with
> > reusable
> >> first stages.
> > I was only looking for a rough guestimate, chill out, hope I didn't take
> > up
> > to much of your valuable trolling time.
> Don't worry about it. He doesn't have time to be nice because he's busy
> trying to figure out the difference between real spaceships and pretty
> pictures.
It's true that Space-X's pretty pictures are little different than the
pretty pictures NASA has put up on its web site for the stick, SDHLV, CEV,
and lunar lander. Even NASA admits that the lunar lander "design" is very
notional and likely to change.
However, the original poster asserted that he thought a fully reusable
launch vehicle would need to use 1000 times more fuel than the shuttle. I
was pointing him in a direction that is far closer to reality than his
fantasy.
Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | ATK Conducts Successful Test Firing Of Space Shuttle Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (PR Newswire via Yahoo! Finance) | May 26, 2007, 6:52 am |
| NASA NAMES DOI TO SHUTTLE CREW TO LAUNCH JAPANESE MODULE | May 5, 2006, 3:15 pm |
| Single Event Upsets for Space Shuttle Flights of New General Purpose Computer Memory Devices | August 28, 2005, 3:32 pm |
| Completely OT But Sad: Peter Boyle | December 13, 2006, 4:44 pm |
| Apollo Comd Module | May 22, 2007, 8:10 pm |
| Single mother in need of explanation | March 13, 2007, 6:08 pm |
| Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module | September 21, 2005, 10:47 pm |
| Update: Replay's -- Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module installation | July 29, 2005, 3:02 am |
| Active Single Engine Roll Control w/ Auto-Gains | March 25, 2007, 10:10 am |
| Sub-Orbital | June 2, 2006, 2:10 am |
|
XML Sitemap
> guessing the only real restriction is the weight of the fuel. How much