On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 23:05:31 -0700, Pierce Nichols
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Aluminum hydride ( AlH3 ) combustion with 98% peroxide has a theoretical
>> Isp of over 400, and a density-Isp of over 600. Great SSTO propellant.
>>
>> Without miscability, there shouldn't be a significant additional detonation
>> risk
> I think my brain just melted...
Just from imagining the heat, right?
>how would you cool the engine? To get
>that kind of Isp even with Al2O3 in the exhaust, it must burn
>ferociously hot.
Especially with Al2O3 in the exhaust. Atomic weight of Al2O3 is 102,
compared to 18 for H2O, 28 for CO, and 44 for CO2. The other reaction
products must have God's own exhaust velocity.
>And I have a very hard time believing that the
>combination isn't poorly behaved in some noisy way. It's so energetic
>and there's no obvious reason for it to be stable, ergo I consider it
>safer to assume that it's not stable. Ignition! has caused me to be very
>leery of that sort of experimentation.
Well, he is in Texas, after all, and we're safe in California... I
will admit I am given pause when John says it's a scary idea. Now if
Russ said it was scary...! :-) But if there's no real detonation
hazard, which seems reasonable, then it's only a fire hazard. "Only."
Yeah. Anyone know how to compute or look up the activation energy?
That's going to determine whether a fire goes WHOOSH or KABOOM!
Still, if it can be done at all safely - wouldn't amateur SSTO be a
kick?
-R
--
"SEAL training is just like Ranger training, except
it's three weeks longer. It takes that long to teach
them how to balance the balls on their noses."
-- Doug Jones
_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
