PuOxy Atmosphe(was; GREETINGS FROM A NEW MENBER...)

It's a bad time to be starting up launcher companies. There is a
projected surplus of launcher capacity over the next ten years already, and
we've recently seen the failure of a launcher company based on simple,
pressure-fed RP1/H2O2 engines, one per stage (i.e., Beale). Other
innovative launcher companies have failed recently (i.e., Roton) or have
scaled-down/changed their activities (i.e., Pioneer). Kistler is
struggling, but might make it with some NASA funding thrown in the pot.

Ron Menich

hollroa@...
Please respond to A NEW MENBER...)
ssi_list

>>>For Apollo-1 it was
>>>>>1.3 bar pure Oxygen.

>>>>They needed a positive pressure of 0.3 bar versus external ambient.>>>

1.3bar pure O2? Now thats just asking for trouble. A better idea might be
an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere with a higher water vapour content than that
of Earth. Imagine 3psi O2, 1.5 psi N2 and 0.5 psi H2O vapour. The only
problem that I can think of is that the water will condense out on cold
surfaces, which may be a problem if you have lots of electrical equipment
hanging around.

>>>>The total funds being returned in the tax rebate is approximately $39
billion. Maybe if enough Americans follow our example we'll end up with
the additional $4 billion necessary to complete the space station as
designed.>>>>

Alternatively, you could start up a small rocket company. A small,
expendable launch vehicle, like the NASA scout rocket, could launch micro
satellites into LEO (10-100Kg) at a fraction of NASA's costs. Americans
could use their tax rebates in order to purchase shares in your new
company. Development costs for the rocket would be around $1-10 million.
The rocket could be fabricated out of fibreglass/epoxy and would burn
LOX/Kerosene or H2O2/Kerosene. The lower stage could be an ordinary solid
fuel booster. On the upper stages, use simple pressure-fed engines (no
turbo pumps) with refractory internal linings. One engine on each stage.
Probably best to stick with three stages. The refractory lining will burn
away during the firing, much as the Shuttle heat-shield does. Combine this
with the fact that individual engine firing times will be quite short and
the need for a complex engine cooling system is neatly avoided. The entire
rocket may have no more than 1000 parts and it could be mass produced by
the thousand per year.

Add a fourth Methane/Oxygen stage and you would be in a position to send
small probes on translunar trajectories. A small rover, maybe a little
larger than sojourner (think I got the spelling wrong) could be delivered
to a lunar site that is thought to contain a volcanic vent. The landing
vehicle would be equipped with a 100 watt solar powered transmitter
(adequate, at the Earth moon distance) and would act as a relay between the
rover and the Earth, much as the pathfinder probe did between Sojourner and
Earth. At the Earth-moon distance, high data transmission rates are
possible at relatively low power. A small and lightweight power supply
could be used. The entire mission could be made to weigh less than 15Kg.
Alternatively, with a bit more financial backing, a 20 kg probe could be
sent to a promising NEA.

Getting the commercial satellites insured will be difficult at first, but
after a dozen successful launches, people like Lloyds of London, may give
you limited coverage.

Tony