FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1961
1961 - 1795.PDF
907 FLIGHT,14 Decembe. 1961 These three vehicles have important roles in the US space programme: from the left, the four-stage, all-solid Scout; the three-stage Delta (with Thor as first stage); and the two-stige Centaur (Atlas first stage) now being developed were in fact three areas of reliability, termed by Mr Hawkins rei-back reliability (a multi-engined safety standard should he aimed at), long-life reliability (the fewer the components the longer the life),and stay-sane reliability (it would be much simpler if men could hibernate during journeys to the Moon or Mars). Failure ratescould be reduced and reliability improved, he concluded, by attention to simplifying system design. For long-range manned missions, nuclear rocket engines havemore potential than the liquid and solid chemical systems, and in particular have a greater potential specific impulse. To obtain thisspecific impulse, the basic problem is one of materials capable of operating at the required high temperatures. Project Rover, under which nuclear rocket engines are beingdeveloped, is directed by the joint NASA/AEC Space Nuclear Propulsion Office established last year. It should result in an oper-ational nuclear rocket engine, i.e., one capable of carrying out an actual manned mission in space, "within about a decade.'" accordingto Dr Glen T. Seaborg, chairman of the US Atomic Energy Commission, with test flights in 1965-67. Although Dr Seaborghas expressed his opinion that the space funds budgeted for nuclear propulsion are adequate, this view was obviously not shared byMr R. W. Bussard of the Nuclear Propulsion Division of Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, who maintained vigorously at theARS meeting that the US was not nearly as diligent as she might be in this new field. Mr KrafTt Ehricke, Centaur programme director for GeneralDynamics/Astronautics, joined Mr Bussard in urging an accelerated nuclear-propulsion programme. Both maintained that the budgetfor this should be increased: Mr Bussard suggested that more money could perhaps be justified if the military use of snace were recon-sidered; if, however, the total for space remained fixed and some other programme had to cut to provide more funds for the nuclearwork, he would suggest reducing the amount of pure scientific research in space carried out by unmanned vehicles. Two other ARS speakers had important comments to mike onother aspects of vehicle development. Mr Kurt H. Debus, director of NASA's Launch Operations Directorate at Huntsville and CapeCanaveral, spoke on launch operations; and Mr Norris F. Dow of General Electric's Space Sciences Laboratory, on special vehicleproblems. Mr Dow discussed the radiation hazard in manned snace flights (if 20,000 volts/cm could be generated in space, shieldingweight could be reduced markedly), the re-entry problem (the paraglider or Rogallo wing concept should be considered as are-entry aid); and the rendezvous problem (rendezvous could be made, not only in Earth orbit, but also "at the other end." i.e., iniunar orbit, using ferry vehicles). On the subject of launch operations, Mr Debus claimed that aquantum jump" was necessary to meet the challenge of the lunar programme. "The present launch-system concept is a victim of the evolution which created it," he said; "Now we have reached the endof evolution, culminating in Complex 34" [the Saturn pad at Cape Canaveral, described in Flight of November 9. 1961]. The heavyservice gantries and reinforced blockhouses were typical of the massive facilities which had evolved. The purpose of the servicing tower was for assembly and pre-paration of the vehicle (and for protection against hurricanes, which made it very expensive); the tower was necessary because assembly-building tests were not considered valid when the vehicle was subsequently moved to the launch-pad. As for the blockhouse, thiswas separated from the vehicle by a minimum distance because of the required transfer of intelligence. Ground support equipmenthad to be as close as possible, hence all the reinforced concrete. A preparation time of approximately two months, plus onemonth to re-prepare the pad after each successful firing, was typical for a Saturn-class vehicle in this type of launch complex—i.e., thelimit was four equally spaced shots per year. The complex repre- sented an investment of some S45m, plus real estate. Mr Debus went on to describe a possible Saturn C-3 complex,which contained neither service tower nor blockhouse. A fixed, four-bay vertical-assembly building would be employed, with thelaunch vehicle and umbilical tower mounted on rails or on a barge. After the vehicle had been checked out in the assembly bay.it would be moved on rails to an arming tower, where escape rockets would be fitted. Then by rail again a distance of, say, 10,000 frto one of about five launch pads. For solid-propellant vehicles. a second assembly building could be used in order to double thelaunch rate. The same equipment would be used for both checkout and launch, so that a blockhouse would not be needed. Although such an installation would cost an estimated SI90mcompared with the S45m for Complex 34, it would permit a much higher rate of launching. To obtain a comparable rate of 32 shotsper year, one would need eight conventional pads, amounting to S360m plus real estate—and a larger area would be covered. ForSaturn C-3 and C-4 vehicles. Mr Debus suggested the new scheme described above. Costs and Vehicles Before continuing from the above generalcomments to details of specific vehicles, it is interesting to note the expenditures involved in four of the major programmes—Saturn.Rover, the F-l engine and solid propellants. NASA's estimated costs up to and including the budget for the current 1962 fiscalyear (Julv I, 1961 to June 30, 1962) are: Saturn, $558m; Rover, S58.lm; F-l engine, SI60.2m and solid propellants, $6.8m. WhenDefense Department and Atomic Energy Commission figures are added, the overall totals are Saturn, S659.3m, Rover S24l.2m.F-l engine $16Im and solid propellants S68.8m. NASA's development of the F-l 1.5m lb thrust liquid-propellantengine for use in Nova is being augmented by a parallel Defenre Department programme leading to large solid boosters. The currenttentative plan is for a segmented solid-propellant motor weighing some 375 tons and providing 2-3m lb thrust for 60sec, which couldbe clustered as required to give the desired total first-stage thrust, and used if necessary also in the second stage. 'Continued overleaf
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
