Suborbital refuelling

Brace yourself: in a few week, second round at The Space Review. God bless Jeff Foust, who is a gentleman. https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3875/1

It was a matter of bringing these three documents together, and re-do the math, to get a workable Excel spreadsheet.
Proof-check, kind of. I managed to do it. Brought Clapp and Goff together, re-did the maths. It worked.

Goff went too far with FLOC while Clapp did not got far enough with Black Horse. Wanted to explore a middleground: a 2 / 3 / 4 / 8 architecture, docking vs refueling.
 
For schemes like that, much more than just the math would have to work out, and I remain firmly skeptical on that...
 
Fair enough. On this, I can agree (as for Jim - when shaking your head, be careful about walls - you could hurt your brain)

I know perfectly who you are, both, and I respect your credentials.
 
Since when CREDENTIALS sounds like a threat ?

I'm not that kind of Internet arrogant dickhead.

If you wanna know, the whole thing is just an interesting intellectual exercise to me. I learned a lot of things in the process.

It is amusing to explore a RLV TSTO "terra incognita". Nothing more.

I know my classical RLV concepts. Also the theory.. Going into orbit is no picnic. Daunting numbers. Hard, unforgiving physics.
 
Last edited:
Jets to replace Delta II solids I can see.
Jets on an orbiter or Starship to only aid in landing I can see.

Best to avoid the hypersonic murk and go all rocket/pop-up and save on the plumbing.
 
Hmmm... I would like to ask you two, please, don't do your usual "back and forth " on that thread... although I know which side I am... thank you...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom