Jump to content

gbleck

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

6 Neutral

Profile Information

  • About me
    Bottle Rocketeer
  1. gbleck
    I finished rondevue contract and burned to reenter kerbin atmosphere from around 70,000 alt. Moderately fast path as a test of the heat shield. Went eva on a lark and couldn't get back in so I decided to ride it down for fun. Used the eva EMU jets full up burn and splashed down with out death from orbit. Is this an intended outcome?
  2. gbleck
    Not really humor. It's aviation and aerospace check list safety being applied to surgical procedure. Started gaining momentum around 5 years ago.
  3. gbleck
    Hell I built one that landed back at the pad without chutes. The mass fraction was low but it was 100% recoverable so cost is not an issue. Haven't tried it with the new destructo pad though. A blown landing could be kind of expensive if you nuke the pad. Should dust that design off and try it again tonight.
  4. gbleck
    Lets see. Mass of two humans minus the mass of water in two humans is lets see. We are around what like 65% water by mass so for an average north american at 80 kilograms you are around 28 Kg for one person. You said we so lets round that to 60 kilograms with a container as I'm less then 80 kilograms. You only have to get there not land just hit so no guidance system needed other then the initial burn and maybe a mid coarse correction. The pathfinder lander was 264 Kg and was launched on a Delta II 7925. Curiosity is like 900 kilograms and was launched on an atlas V. I'm thinking you can get two humans to mars at the next transfer orbit window no problem. Living humans perhaps a bit harder.
  5. gbleck
    I think your first wing example has the wing on sideways. I'm not sure but I think the sp wings may be directional.
  6. gbleck
    I would argue Buran was better as it didn't pull massive amounts of funding away from lower cost systems that where more survivable. Sts was drop dead .... though.
  7. gbleck
    Gilly your drunk. Go home. Priceless.
  8. gbleck
    The hyoe train is hype powered. The mun only looks small because it was full of hype. It was sucked dry of hype by the hype train.
  9. gbleck
    B9 HYPE TRAIN-PLAIN-SHUTTEL to the MUN!
  10. gbleck
    Thank you i have beed trying to remember the name of that movie for years. Will post pics of b9 hypetrain tonight.
  11. gbleck
    randl mour's new book what if covers the reentry without heat shield question. I guess the real question is how damage is it and how? If it creates to large an asymmetrical aerodynamic force your going to have a bad time. The supper draco may provide a lot sas but probably not roll damping the regular draco would provide that.
  12. gbleck
    I belive they are using a cost plus contract. If you go over budget you just eat into your profit. The contract is it self the caret and stick.
  13. gbleck
    My guess for cost is price per launch of a atlas vs a falcon.
  14. gbleck
    One conservative and one NOT AT ALL CONSERVATIVE won. The Boeing is a strait up Apollo like vehicle. The Dragon 2 will land at an exact landing sight under power. The only advantage a wing design like dream chaser has is slightly less G load for injured personnel and more cross range EDL. Dream chaser loses on mass and thermal protection. It's also an old design. Bolden alluded to the fact that the NASA flights are only part of the flights these will do to space. Space X has Bigalo on the launch manifest for this 2015 and Boeing has an agreement to take tourists to Bigalo's space stations. There will be more launches to LEO then just NASA.
  15. gbleck
    Remember that its Dragon V2 on a Falcon9 or Dream Chaser or CS100 both on a Atlas 5. They couldn't really go with SNC and Boeing without creating a single point of failure. The Atlas 5 comes down to a reliance on Russian engines or possibly Blue Origin getting a new main engine for the Atlas 5 flight certified by 2017.
×
×
  • Create New...