More New Details on NASA's CEV Launcher Studies 361
TheEqualizer writes "Continuing on the NYT story on NASA's current CEV launcher plans, spaceref has an even
more extensive look with detailed assessments of the available options. By all accounts, it looks like NASA is picking up where it left off with Apollo but also combining it with established Shuttle technology -- the capsule concept of the 1960s atop the shuttle boosters of the 1970s being the winning combination under the current budgetary limitations. However, is this coupling of
old technology and designs really the best we can do?"
The best we can do (Score:3, Interesting)
To alleviate the problem, the Orion team proposed a hybrid solution - use Saturn-class chemical rockets to launch an Orion booster. They figured they could build an Orion-class ship that weighed around 150 tons, well within Saturn's ability to loft 400 tons.
NASA's current proposal takes us back to being able to re-consider Orion. What killed the idea was NASA's aversion to risk. There wasn't any appetite for developing a rocket engine that could only be fully tested in space.
The idea of using nukes for Earth launch never completed died. Ted Taylor, one of the Orion team members, figured he could design a nuclear bomb that didn't emit any radiation at all. Ironically, the neutron bomb was an outgrowth of his work.
Re:If it ain't broke... (Score:3, Interesting)
Poor assumption (Score:3, Interesting)
I can't help but think there has to be an air breathing way to do the SRB's... though if you can't shave any weight in the process of providing the same power it is essentially just a lot of work for no gain... unless the safety margian is greater.... a fly back and fast turnaround would make it worth it though.