[AR] Re: APCP properties, was Re: Re: starship abort?

  • From: roxanna Mason <rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 20:56:27 -0700

Maybe it's just wishful thinking but if level heads prevail and push
politics aside, eventually all large boosters will be liquid,
at least for man rated vehicles..

Ken

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 8:25 PM Troy Prideaux <troy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Yeah, much has changed *in general industry* since then with static mixing
becoming more and more common. It might be only a matter of time before the
technology works through to the larger solids although it's far from a
given.

Troy

-----Original Message-----
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On
Behalf
Of Henry Spencer
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2023 12:35 PM
To: Arocket List <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AR] Re: APCP properties, was Re: Re: starship abort?

On Fri, 28 Apr 2023, Troy Prideaux wrote:
For really big stuff, it would make more sense (to me) to employ
static mixing technology instead of large planetary.

Continuous-flow mixing (don't know exactly what technology) was planned
for
ASRM, the post-Challenger attempt at an improved SRB.  At the time, it
was
considered a significant development risk, so I gather it hadn't been
done
before
for solid-rocket fuels.




Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. arocket
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2023