View Single Post
Old September 30 2012, 09:04 PM   #192
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Envisioning the world of 2100

newtype_alpha wrote: View Post
More spam. Let's not.
Now, now, Av Week is a serious trade publication


newtype_alpha wrote: View Post
Strictly speaking, that's because no one is calling for propellant depots. So far it's just a design concept that hasn't been seriously developed or tested and no funding has been offered or asked for to seek a feasibility study.THEY aren't doing any serious work in space either and I don't really give a shit what they think until they do.
Ouch, I thought you were pro-depot.

Now I was looking at the whole 'capture-to-capture' deal. One of the things a high orbit does is still allow for telepresence if you don't land.

Something I hope they look into might be the possiblity of a depot in Mars Orbit.

Yes that sounds odd, but what scares people about hypergolics is its toxicity--and yet they didn't mind that crane/crasher stage blowing up there. The bad thing about cryogenics (with the best Isp) is that it boils off. That's also good in that it becomes a gas. Droplets of hypergolic fuel are thought to be a threat to our satellites exactly because they don't boil away so easily. Pentaborane was a zip propellant--and it broke down into another hypergolic fuel--but it was super-toxic and phased out.

A hypergolic depot in Mars threatens very little. Non-hypergolic storables like H2O2 and Kerosene (Beal's choice) might not scare Elon Musk as much as hypergolics--and he doesn't need any cryo-cooler whatzits.

Now Orbitec has a new vortex cooled engine here:
http://www.astronautix.com/engines/orbngine.htm
But I though engine vortices were bad. I remember a Titan II nozzle that was buzz sawed off at the base due to some type of instability, as shown in this book: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1557286019?...533-7_1978.php.


That wasn't the only accident involving that hypergolic monster:
http://www.techbastard.com/missile/t...533-7_1978.php

These Nedelin moments are what scares folks away from storables.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe

At any rate, having a fuel bunker on one of Mars moons would add to infrastructure and give astronauts options--and not be a threat to assets in LEO in that the hypergolics might be ampulized as the Soviets did later for SLBMs and valves only opened up at Mars. The propellants may last a long time there.
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote