Randall Clague wrote:
> China Lake had a boo-boo recently where a couple grams (which is,
> admittedly, a lot of vapor) of peroxide got hit with a peroxide hammer.
How did they manage to contrive _that_ particular combination of circumstances?
-dave w
_
At 09:42 PM 11/1/2002 -0800, you wrote:
Randall Clague wrote:
> I'm under the same impression. Why Armadillo is having this problem,
> and ERPS isn't, when we're using very similar equipment, is a bit of a
> mystery. It must be warmer in California than it is in Texas.
My humble opinion is that
Randall Clague wrote:
> I'm under the same impression. Why Armadillo is having this problem,
> and ERPS isn't, when we're using very similar equipment, is a bit of a
> mystery. It must be warmer in California than it is in Texas.
My humble opinion is that some of the refinements in cat pack
con
On Sat, 2 Nov 2002 09:59:42 +1100, "Jake Anderson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I was trying to avoid having a truck full of hot peroxide
You don't want hot peroxide in anything. You may want warm peroxide.
If you want warm peroxide, the truck as a piece of GSE can be
arbitrarily heavy, and can b
Hmm. Have visions of this hand-operated valve getting stuck and
everyone gasping their last. That's bad.
But then I realised you could carry a COaxial Resealing Kit to manually
seal this off . That would work. Or maybe a Big UNiversal Gasket could be
used. Hmm. Perhaps I should
On Sat, 2 Nov 2002 10:13:44 +1100, "Jake Anderson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am just struck by the similarity between what is happening now and the
>mercury 7 sub-orbital flight
And that just chased away my cynical pessimism. Thank you, Jake.
The key part of your observation is exactly that
On Fri, 01 Nov 2002 17:05:00 -0600, John Carmack
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Our current thinking is to carry an air bottle, and intentionally let the
>cabin leak a bit to force some air circulation, dehumidification, and
>cooling. There will also be a hand-operated valve to force it to leak mo
Just for reference this is the same/simmilar design as the mercury system.
differrence being they used pure O2 at 5psi. that worked for missions up to
gordon coopers 34hours and 20 minutes.
I am just struck by the similarity between what is happening now and the
mercury 7 sub-orbital flight
-
At 09:26 AM 11/1/2002 -0800, you wrote:
On Fri, 01 Nov 2002 08:16:06 -0800, Doug Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I kinda get the impression that once the cat bed is warmed by a previous
>pulse, subsequent ones should not have significant uncatalyzed
>throughput, and PWM throttling keeps the bed
We ran a similar exercise here for Armadillo's life support system.
We concluded that they didn't need one. The flight is so short, and
the cabin so large, that CO2 levels won't rise to uncomfortable levels
during the flight even if they don't scrub the air. We also
determined that dumping the
I was trying to avoid having a truck full of hot peroxide
that sounds like a "Bad Thing"TM perhaps a line heater mebe? and the 80C
number was just something I pulled out of my ass to fill in a blank.
I was under the impression from Armadillo that for them at least the ambient
temperature of their
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The preheat option is simply for the startup transient. Once the
> catpack is hot, it should stay hot as long as peroxide keeps flowing.
> Pulsing is fine also, as long as the catpack doesn't cool down too
> much between pulses. Again, all this assumes that any catal
The preheat option is simply for the startup transient. Once the
catpack is hot, it should stay hot as long as peroxide keeps flowing.
Pulsing is fine also, as long as the catpack doesn't cool down too
much between pulses. Again, all this assumes that any catalyst
good for 100% peroxide *can't* d
I would think if you're all that interested in
pre-heating the peroxide before it enters the
combustion chamber, then the best approach would be to
regeneratively cool the engine. Even if you weren't
all that keen on the regenerative cooling as an engine
preservative, you might as well use at leas
One of the main benefits to using peroxide .vs. LOX is its density
impulse and non-cryo operation. The density of 100% peroxide at
0 C is 1.472 gm/cc; at 40 C its 1.427 gm/cc, which is a 3% difference.
This would probably require an oxidizer tank about 3% heavier.
Counteracting this is a TBD slig
On Fri, 01 Nov 2002 08:16:06 -0800, Doug Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I kinda get the impression that once the cat bed is warmed by a previous
>pulse, subsequent ones should not have significant uncatalyzed
>throughput, and PWM throttling keeps the bed hot.
Good point. If we can assume th
On Fri, 01 Nov 2002 14:31:35 +, Ian Woollard
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Where do you imagine we'll fly POGO that's cold enough to matter?
>>
>Hmm. I haven't checked but I would expect launch licenses would be
>easier to get near Ottawa or Toronto ;-)
>
>You'd have difficulty getting an expo
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 08:03:45 -0500, "Sean Patrick Daly"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I don't know about anyone else, but I'm under the impression that the higher
>you go, the colder you get. So I guess the real question is... What is going
>to happen to the H2O2 above say... 50,000+ feet? Will the e
On Sat, 2 Nov 2002 00:15:54 +1100, "Jake Anderson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>what i was also implying is if you did it 10 minutes before launch (assuming
>you have a decent volume of peroxide/fuel onboard) it wouldnt make much of a
>difference to the temperature at launch time (if you have an 80
Randall Clague wrote:
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 23:53:58 -0800, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tape heaters are inappropriate for Spike, since the propellant tank is part of
the aeroshell and it needs to be very clean aerodynamically
Hm, I'd been assuming the tanks were not integral. If they are, the
Randall Clague wrote:
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 23:53:58 -0800, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Where do you imagine we'll fly POGO that's cold enough to matter?
Hmm. I haven't checked but I would expect launch licenses would be
easier to get near Ottawa or Toronto ;-)
You'd have difficulty getting
what i was also implying is if you did it 10 minutes before launch (assuming
you have a decent volume of peroxide/fuel onboard) it wouldnt make much of a
difference to the temperature at launch time (if you have an 80deg(C) load
of liquid its not going to cool to a level that makes a big difference
On 1 Nov, Randall Clague wrote:
> If you fly the heater - really just some resistive tape wrapped around
> the tank - then the only moving part you have to worry about for
> pre-liftoff heater disconnect is the power plug. I dislike moving
> things around just prior to liftoff, but I can live wit
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm under the impression that the higher
you go, the colder you get. So I guess the real question is... What is going
to happen to the H2O2 above say... 50,000+ feet? Will the engine restart at
those temperatures? Will there ever be a need to?
Personally, I wou
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 23:53:58 -0800, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tape heaters are inappropriate for Spike, since the propellant tank is part of
>the aeroshell and it needs to be very clean aerodynamically
Hm, I'd been assuming the tanks were not integral. If they are, then
tape heaters get margin
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 18:45:05 +1100, "Jake Anderson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>why fly the heater at all?
>if the tank is at the right temperature or thereabouts it shouldnt change
>that quickly put a sensor in your tank and the heaters in a jacket on the
>outside when its hot enough drop the jack
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Jake Anderson wrote:
> why fly the heater at all?
> if the tank is at the right temperature or thereabouts it shouldnt change
> that quickly put a sensor in your tank and the heaters in a jacket on the
> outside when its hot enough drop the jacket and hit the button
Now you nee
27 matches
Mail list logo
