FA+
Shop
940
Views
Views
9
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Designs / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1280 x 1064
File Size 448.1 kB
Report this content
More from zearfox
First Launched in 1995, The British Space Shuttle Program became the manned space vehicle of the UK. The first of their Orbiters was named "Illustrious", It was followed by another UK-built Orbiter in 1998 named "Indefatigable"
Development of the Shuttle was heavily based off the Furry Space Shuttle of the United States, but with improvements, innovations and lessons learnt from it's US counterpart. It was built to be smaller, lighter (for it's size) and with modifications such as a non-reusable Kerosene main engine, which saved costs.
As the program continued into the early 2000s, the UK Space Agency merged with the EFSA and the British Space Shuttle became the Primary Manned Spacecraft of the European Union. This also came at the time of construction of the Interspecies Space Station, and with the American Furry Space Shuttle became the workhorses of the Project.
With the aid of other EU nations, a third Orbiter, "Immaculate" was constructed and first launched in 2002. The British Space Shuttles are now the Primary European Transport to the Space Station, in addition to the US Furry SPace Shuttle and the Russian Soyuz
Development of the Shuttle was heavily based off the Furry Space Shuttle of the United States, but with improvements, innovations and lessons learnt from it's US counterpart. It was built to be smaller, lighter (for it's size) and with modifications such as a non-reusable Kerosene main engine, which saved costs.
As the program continued into the early 2000s, the UK Space Agency merged with the EFSA and the British Space Shuttle became the Primary Manned Spacecraft of the European Union. This also came at the time of construction of the Interspecies Space Station, and with the American Furry Space Shuttle became the workhorses of the Project.
With the aid of other EU nations, a third Orbiter, "Immaculate" was constructed and first launched in 2002. The British Space Shuttles are now the Primary European Transport to the Space Station, in addition to the US Furry SPace Shuttle and the Russian Soyuz
Category Designs / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1280 x 1064px
File Size 448.1 kB
Don't I wish!
There is no reason that the main LOX/RP-1 engine couldn't be reused. We built a stainless steel LOX/RP-1 engine using a Lunar Excursion Module Descent Engine type pintle propellant injector, burned it for 800 seconds on a test stand, then dropped it into the Pacific ocean chained to a pier. After 6 months, we fished it out, flushed it with high pressure water, replaced the O ring seals, and ran it for another 800 seconds. It worked perfectly. We proposed using a pressurized tank system like the Atlas to eliminate the cost of the turbo pumps and to provide more structural rigidity with less mass. The strap-ons were of the same design rather than solids which would have saved a LOT of money. When one is using LOX/RP-1 rather than LOX/LH, the tanks are much smaller and have a lot less mass. We projected lower mission costs with that as a first stage and LOX/LH for the upper stage. LOX/RP-1 has better ISP than the ammonium perchlorate/aluminum/polymer solids and is waaaayyyyyy less expensive.
There is no reason that the main LOX/RP-1 engine couldn't be reused. We built a stainless steel LOX/RP-1 engine using a Lunar Excursion Module Descent Engine type pintle propellant injector, burned it for 800 seconds on a test stand, then dropped it into the Pacific ocean chained to a pier. After 6 months, we fished it out, flushed it with high pressure water, replaced the O ring seals, and ran it for another 800 seconds. It worked perfectly. We proposed using a pressurized tank system like the Atlas to eliminate the cost of the turbo pumps and to provide more structural rigidity with less mass. The strap-ons were of the same design rather than solids which would have saved a LOT of money. When one is using LOX/RP-1 rather than LOX/LH, the tanks are much smaller and have a lot less mass. We projected lower mission costs with that as a first stage and LOX/LH for the upper stage. LOX/RP-1 has better ISP than the ammonium perchlorate/aluminum/polymer solids and is waaaayyyyyy less expensive.
But won't the external tank burn up from the altitude it's jettisoned? YOu think it would've been better to have the engine attached to the shuttle and the External Tank to simply be an external fuel tank?
I agree, and SpaceX have learnt that as well. (Hooray for Privatised Spaceflight!) Kerosene might not be as fuel efficient as Liquid Hydrogen, but it's a lot more energy dense and hell cheaper and easier to handle, plus you don't need as much foam insulation so that lessens the load and risk of another Columbia.
I agree, and SpaceX have learnt that as well. (Hooray for Privatised Spaceflight!) Kerosene might not be as fuel efficient as Liquid Hydrogen, but it's a lot more energy dense and hell cheaper and easier to handle, plus you don't need as much foam insulation so that lessens the load and risk of another Columbia.
So there could be a barrier internally within the tank that is made of the ablative heat shield, like a compartment. The tank would fall nose first and burn up until it reaches the ablative shield, after which a parachute could be released and the engine collected from the Caribbean sea?
Naw, Land Rover are better staying on the ground, BAE know can build something for space.
Also, when the UK Space Agency and the British Space Shuttle become part of the European Furry Space Agency, the Germans then make several changes such as the change to liquid rocket boosters and replacement of several components with simpler and lighter ones which reduce the running costs by 30% and increase the payload capacity to 23 tons from the current 17.5. And the third shuttle, Immaculate is built ground-up with german involvement and this shuttle has a payload capacity of 26 tons
Also, when the UK Space Agency and the British Space Shuttle become part of the European Furry Space Agency, the Germans then make several changes such as the change to liquid rocket boosters and replacement of several components with simpler and lighter ones which reduce the running costs by 30% and increase the payload capacity to 23 tons from the current 17.5. And the third shuttle, Immaculate is built ground-up with german involvement and this shuttle has a payload capacity of 26 tons
Comments