[AR] Re: changing hardware (was Re: Re: Re spacex falcon 9 landing)

  • From: Ben Brockert <wikkit@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:17:45 -0500

Nasa's X-37 was peroxide/kerosene. It is the common nontoxic alternative.

I'm having a hard time finding a reliable and sourced citation for
what the DOD's X-37B is now, but I've heard that it's the unusual
combo of peroxide and a hydrazine. It may just be traditional
storables though.

Ben

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:02 PM, David Weinshenker <daze39@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 12/28/2015 01:43 PM, Henry Spencer wrote:

Some things that would have substantially reduced ops costs -- notably,
a switch to nontoxic RCS/OMS propellants -- never made it in, not
because there was any fundamental obstacle, but because it was always
cheaper to carry on with the existing design a little longer.


What sort of alternate propellant system did they have in mind for that?

-dave w




Other related posts: