Air launch capability

[scottb50]

<br /><br />Even the small nonsteerable SRBs used on the EELVs cost $1 million apiece. That would buy a lot of flying hours...<br /><br />They don't have to be that complicated, with liquid engines slightly offset for better control on launch they could provide more then adequate steering as well as thrust. Since my Launch Vehicle returns empty the weight of the SRB Housing and Nozzle is minimal.<br /><br />Unbolt the aft Segment and Nozzle, remove the propellant casings, inspect and clean or repair as needed. The aft Segment and Nozzle are attached to the Shuttle transport and propellant segments stacked. The Launcher is then lowered in place over the segments and bolted into place.<br /><br />Pressure fed engines, no turbo-pumps. Just a combustion chamber and nozzle, cooled by Helium, which provides the pressure to the propellant tank. When the Launcher returns Helium is cooled and re-used. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

He is not a good coolant.<br /><br /><br />"Unbolt the aft Segment and Nozzle, remove the propellant casings, inspect and clean or repair as needed. The aft Segment and Nozzle are attached to the Shuttle transport and propellant segments stacked. The Launcher is then lowered in place over the segments and bolted into place."<br /><br />Not a really viable

 

[vulture2]

>Even the small nonsteerable SRBs used on the EELVs cost $1 million apiece. That would buy a lot of flying hours...<br /><br /> />>They don't have to be that complicated, with liquid engines slightly offset for better control on launch they could provide more then adequate steering as well as thrust."<br /><br />$1M is for the relatively small, nonsteerable GEM-60 type sold fuel boosters used on the Delta IV and Atlas V. That's assuming the liquid engine provides all the steering. The large steerable SRB's used with the Shuttle have been reported to be about $30M to refurbish, but are probably much more expensive. The procedure you are talking about sounds more like rebuilding a Shuttle SRB; it's very labor intensive and quite hazardous as well. I'm not aware of any study that has ever found it was actually be less expensive to recover and reuse a solid-fuel rocket engine than to build a new one of similar performance.<br />

 

[scottb50]

My idea is a basic tube being part of the airframe of the Launcher. Segments similar to those used by the Shuttle SRB's, but with a lighter composite casing would be inserted into the tubes.<br /><br />It becomes more a project of removing the casings and inserting new segments, that seems pretty simple to me. I said nothing about recovering the motor, like they do the Shuttle SRB's, what I propose is simply refilling the expended tubes, pretty much like adding propellant to an existing tank. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

Why the 2 shells/casings? Just need the one and it has to take the motor pressures

 

[Swampcat]

<font color="yellow">"Segments similar to those used by the Shuttle SRB's, but with a lighter composite casing would be inserted into the tubes."</font><br /><br />This sounds like what is used in amateur rocketry where reloadable motors are regularly used.<br /><br />The example shown below is a Loki Research motor with an aluminum casing, 4 propellant grains (the green parts), a graphite nozzle, fore and aft closures, various o-rings and snap rings, a delay grain and a parachute deployment charge. The propellant grains are cast in a cardboard tube in most of these types of motors.<br /><br />The largest motor of this type is 152mm in diameter and 5 feet long and uses an ammonium perchlorate based propellant mixture that is very similar to the Shuttle SRB propellant. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>