Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

Websites
related space history websites

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Space Shuttles - Space Station
  The Shuttle: in retrospect

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   The Shuttle: in retrospect
lucspace
Member

Posts: 257
From: Hilversum, The Netherlands
Registered: Oct 2003

posted 07-03-2006 01:41 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for lucspace   Click Here to Email lucspace     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If only they had decided...

Luc

[This message has been edited by collectSPACE Admin (edited July 03, 2006).]

KSCartist
Member

Posts: 2488
From: Titusville, FL USA
Registered: Feb 2005

posted 07-03-2006 02:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for KSCartist   Click Here to Email KSCartist     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Luc-

Try this- place the orbiter on top of the second stage of the Saturn V. In looking at my 144 scale models of both - it looks like it could have fit.
(I wonder where the White Room swing arm would have been?)

Tim

nasamad
Member

Posts: 1890
From: Essex, UK
Registered: Jul 2001

posted 07-03-2006 02:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for nasamad   Click Here to Email nasamad     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
RSS looks scary in this config though !!!

Hope you don't mind Robert, I used one of your great pics :-)

Adam

P.S. Only a few years until we see this sight for real.

[This message has been edited by nasamad (edited July 03, 2006).]

mjanovec
Member

Posts: 3593
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005

posted 07-03-2006 03:43 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for mjanovec   Click Here to Email mjanovec     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The problem with that design, Luc, is how will the SSMEs fire? Unless if you intended for the Shuttle main engines to be moved to the bottom of the ET. (Of course, then the engines would be destroyed for each mission when the ET re-entered the atmosphere.)

The ET would also need to be heavily reinforced to carry the shuttle in that manner, particularly at the attach point between the tank and the orbiter. Any "flex" in the stack during flight would put incredible stresses on the attach point.

[This message has been edited by mjanovec (edited July 03, 2006).]

nasamad
Member

Posts: 1890
From: Essex, UK
Registered: Jul 2001

posted 07-03-2006 04:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for nasamad   Click Here to Email nasamad     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

I would have the SSME's in the normal place and have them fire on the pad, the resulting explosion should be enough to put the orbiter into orbit !

Adam.

FFrench
Member

Posts: 3093
From: San Diego
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 07-03-2006 04:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for FFrench     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

Then there is always:
http://www.abo.fi/~mlindroo/SpaceLVs/Slides/sld030.htm

- which if they would have done in the first place, we'd have spent far less overall (higher development costs in the early 70s, but probably much, much less in operational costs ever since) and wouldn't have this foam issue to contend with at all.

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 1999-2012 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement