Author Topic: Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals  (Read 2735 times)

Offline realtime

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 574
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 16
Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals
« on: 10/24/2005 03:44 am »
Thought some of you out there might like to see these.  Back when there were more than two (or is that one) companies bidding on contracts.

http://www.astronautix.com/lvfam/shuosals.htm


Offline Avron

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4930
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 160
RE: Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals
« Reply #1 on: 10/24/2005 04:05 am »
Quote
realtime - 23/10/2005  11:44 PM

Thought some of you out there might like to see these.  Back when there were more than two (or is that one) companies bidding on contracts.

http://www.astronautix.com/lvfam/shuosals.htm

Very cool...

"Finally, NASA estimated that a simple fully reusable TSTO configuration such as the GD Triamese would have a development cost $4.5B (=$20.5B at 1999 economic conditions) but the cost per launch would only be $3.2 million (=$14.5M in FY’99 $s, or $640/kg). "

Only NASA would sell this to themselves, wonder if MSFC was involved?

Offline realtime

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 574
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 16
RE: Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals
« Reply #2 on: 10/24/2005 04:24 am »
There's plenty of food for thought in there.  An interesting bit of analysis at the end of this discussion on TPS:

Quote
In late 1969 the USAF had indicated a preference for all-aluminium structures in the shuttle due to a titanium shortage. This requirement forced a move to non-metallic thermal protection systems, which at the time it was thought would weigh 15% less but cost 300% more. Thermal protection shingles for a titanium structure would weigh 2300 to 4500 kg less, but an aluminium structure would weight about 1800 kg more - meaning there was no essential weight difference between the two approaches. Therefore at the aluminium structure was accepted as a specification requirement. In retrospect it could hardly have been necessary to apply this requirement on a project where only a few flight vehicles were be built. It made the shuttle much more vulnerable to any breach of heat shield integrity and would lead to the death of the Columbia crew 35 years later. The resulting need for a non-metallic thermal protection system would also have enormous cost and schedule consequences for the actual program.
The man has a talent for understatement...

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/shur134g.htm


Offline Avron

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4930
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 160
RE: Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals
« Reply #3 on: 10/24/2005 06:12 pm »
Quote
realtime - 24/10/2005  12:24 AM

There's plenty of food for thought in there.  An interesting bit of analysis at the end of this discussion on TPS:

Quote
In late 1969 the USAF had indicated a preference for all-aluminium structures in the shuttle due to a titanium shortage. This requirement forced a move to non-metallic thermal protection systems, which at the time it was thought would weigh 15% less but cost 300% more. Thermal protection shingles for a titanium structure would weigh 2300 to 4500 kg less, but an aluminium structure would weight about 1800 kg more - meaning there was no essential weight difference between the two approaches. Therefore at the aluminium structure was accepted as a specification requirement. In retrospect it could hardly have been necessary to apply this requirement on a project where only a few flight vehicles were be built. It made the shuttle much more vulnerable to any breach of heat shield integrity and would lead to the death of the Columbia crew 35 years later. The resulting need for a non-metallic thermal protection system would also have enormous cost and schedule consequences for the actual program.
The man has a talent for understatement...

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/shur134g.htm

I understand that the cost breakdown (300% more for Titanium) was off a bit, like the other way around but 4 fold the other way round... like 1200% more for aluminium ... After all said and done Titanium would have been real cheap..

Ok, I know is with hindsight, but what where they thinking??


Offline FransonUK

  • Don't ya wish your spaceship was hot like me...don't ya
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 1
RE: Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals
« Reply #4 on: 10/24/2005 06:18 pm »
Most of those ships look like lifting bodies (and very cool too). Why did NASA go with wings in the end?
Don't ya wish your spaceship was hot like me

Offline Chris SF

  • Regular
  • Member
  • Posts: 73
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals
« Reply #5 on: 10/24/2005 07:08 pm »
Very interesting, thanks for the link.

Offline realtime

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 574
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 16
RE: Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals
« Reply #6 on: 10/24/2005 10:22 pm »
Quote
FransonUK - 24/10/2005  2:18 PM

Most of those ships look like lifting bodies (and very cool too). Why did NASA go with wings in the end?
USAF wanted the cross-range capability afforded by wings, and NASA needed the USAF to fund Shuttle.  Then USAF lofted one military payload and decided they'd be better off with their own systems.

Picky, picky.


Offline Avron

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4930
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 160
RE: Oldies but Goodies - Shuttle Proposals
« Reply #7 on: 10/25/2005 02:48 am »
Quote
realtime - 24/10/2005  6:22 PM

Quote
FransonUK - 24/10/2005  2:18 PM

Most of those ships look like lifting bodies (and very cool too). Why did NASA go with wings in the end?
USAF wanted the cross-range capability afforded by wings, and NASA needed the USAF to fund Shuttle.  Then USAF lofted one military payload and decided they'd be better off with their own systems.

Picky, picky.

But they still have the ability to use the Shuttle, ... they did not put all their eggs in the same basket

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1