[AR] Re: changing hardware (was Re: Re: Re spacex falcon 9 landing)
- From: Henry Spencer <hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Arocket List <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 19:29:36 -0500 (EST)
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015, David Weinshenker wrote:
Some things that would have substantially reduced ops costs -- notably,
a switch to nontoxic RCS/OMS propellants -- never made it in...
What sort of alternate propellant system did they have in mind for that?
The preferred choice changed over time, and also with who was doing the
studies.
In the very beginning, the shuttle was going to be an all-LOX/LH2 vehicle,
which probably meant GOX/GH2 for RCS, but that idea was quickly scrapped
when the extent of the budget problems became clear. Later on, LOX/CH4,
peroxide/ethanol, and LOX/ethanol all showed up in proposals; there may
have been other ideas as well. LOX-based concepts often converted LOX to
GOX for the RCS thrusters, to avoid a lot of insulated plumbing.
Henry
Other related posts: