View Single Post
Old November 16 2012, 08:12 AM   #344
Location: Kentucky
Re: Envisioning the world of 2100

sojourner wrote: View Post
gturner wrote: View Post
You mean the Me-163, He-176, X-1, X-1A, X-2, X-4, and X-15 weren't rockets, they were jets? Someone call the Air Force!
Nope, they're not rockets. They're rocket powered aircraft and none of them were capable of attaining orbit, let alone with a useable payload.
And none of the missiles of the period were capable of attaining orbit either, X-15 contemporaries excepted, and I can't recall the last time an RPG went orbital due to it's lack of wings, even when aimed at the sky over Mogadishu. None of the reasons the X planes didn't achieve orbit have anything to do with the the orientation of the fuel container. Smart people know that. Dumb people don't. There are rocket equations that tell you these things.

The X-1 had a horizontal rocket-fuel tank stressed for 20 G's. The Air Force has hung iiquid fueled intercept missiles on aircraft, where they experience severe sideward G-loads as a part of normal operations. Apparently, although obviously nobody in rocketry today has the knowledge of how to do it, at one time engineers knew how to design a horizontal fuel cylinder to a set of design specifications. (Some engineers in fields like conventional aviation, rail and truck transport, and the energy industries have hidden away these design secrets).
none of those vehicles/tanks were trying to achieve orbit either.ah, ah, you're moving goalposts again. You claim to be able to ground launch a vehicle the size of a Saturn 5Please, don't be so hard on yourself. (get it? hard- dense?)until you need it to achieve orbit with a payload as large as an Apollo mission instead of some relativily small warheadsno, you can't
You can lift anything with a rocket. The Saturn V is an example of lifting something big with a rocket, and it was lifted from the ground. So yes, I think it was possible to lift something as large as a Saturn V using rockets. You obviously do not. We'll just have to disagree on the reality of the moon landings.

(which, after all, allow for precision or we wouldn't be using them for ICBM's or the Space Shuttle)
solids aren't precise. They are powerfully brutish with no throttle control. Which is why they are used in early stage of flight on STS and ICBMs to allow for plenty of time to course correct after they burn out.
Solids are very precise, because they're used in a control loop with feedback. Liquids are somewhat more precise, but only somewhat. You can gimbal the thrust of both, and you can measure the thrust of both, and you can terminate the thrust of both. You only need the throttle control if you can't predetermine how much thrust you'll need, which is not the case during a launch, otherwise we'd have never launched a single Space Shuttle mission.

Keep in mind that you're arguing that small solids are useless for a 20 second imprecise launch application while advocating that we build entire launch systems to rely on them for precision performance, such as the Shuttle, SLS, and Delta IV.

To the military, this kind of thing is trivial. To NASA types it's apparently more baffling than a warp drive and they think it simply can't be done.
Neither here nor there. If the military were trying to build a vehicle to get to orbit they would have the same exact problems. It's only trivial because you don't know what you're talking about.
So, the Air Force has never eyed orbit. It's just completely beyond their radar. They've also never flown the X-1, X-1A, X-2, or X-15, and they never had programs called Dyna Soar, Blue Gemini, and a host of others, the latest being the X-37B, which never went into orbit, despite all the lies perpetuated by the same media that claimed the moon landings were real, even though it's impossible to launch a Saturn V from the ground.

Ironically, the director of that program is working with Stratolaunch, apparently consulting with the engineer privy to the secret Peenemunde documents on horizontal fuel tanks.
gturner is offline   Reply With Quote