This produced 188,000 kgf using a smaller fixed nozzle. Pratt & Whitney seemed to have a clear lead in this portion of the competition, having produced the XLR-129-P-1, a prototype high-pressure Lox/LH2 engine under USAF contract. The engine for the booster was to use a 5:1 ratio expansion nozzle, producing 227,000 kgf at sea level. The engine was to have a thrust of 270,000 kgf in vacuum, 235,000 kgf at sea level, and be throttleable from 73% to 100% of the rated thrust. The orbiter would be equipped with a two-position deployable nozzle, with expansion ratios of 58:1 for the low altitude portion of the ascent, and 120:1 with the extension deployed for the vacuum portion of the flight to orbit. The same basic engine (combustion chamber and turbomachinery) was to be used in both stages of the planned two-stage fully-recoverable shuttle. Rocketdyne and Pratt & Whitney were selected for the Phase A, advanced study phase of the competition. Martin Marietta did not receive a contract but was allowed to continue using company funds. Despite promising classified work on linear and conventional aerospike engines at the time, NASA dictated that the design had to use a conventional bell nozzle.įollowing evaluation of proposals submitted against the October 1968 request for proposal, NASA issued Advanced Design contracts for the shuttle to General Dynamics, Lockheed, McDonnell Douglas, and North American Rockwell. Oversight for this program came from the USAF Space Division and its subcontractor, the Aerospace Corporation. The Space Shuttle Main Engine competition was run in parallel with the main shuttle development project, and also had four phases. General Dynamics, Lockheed, McDonnell-Douglas, Martin Marietta, and North American Rockwell all were invited to bid. The re-entry vehicle should have a cross range of at least 725 km (NASA persisted in this requirement even though it knew the USAF needed more). The requirements were for 2,300 to 23,000 kg of payload to be delivered into a 500-km altitude orbit. NASA Houston and Huntsville jointly issued the Request for Proposal for eight-month Phase A ILRV studies. Four contractors or contractor teams were to be selected in Phase A two contractors or teams for Phase B and then a single contractor for Phases C and D (which were later combined). The development program was seen as: Phase A: Advanced Studies Phase B: Project Definition Phase C: Vehicle Design and Phase D: Production and Operations. At the beginning the design was known by the same nomenclature previously used by the USAF - Integrated Launch and Re-entry Vehicle (ILRV). NASA began the design, bidding, and source selection process leading to a single national space shuttle. Technology Applications and Science Experiment, Science and Applications Manned Space Platform, Other designations: Shuttle STS (Space Transportation System). Other designations: Solid Rocket Booster. Flyaway Unit Cost 1985$: 63.000 million in 1977 dollars in 1988 dollars. Launch Price $: 245.000 million in 1988 dollars. Redesign of the shuttle with reliability in mind after the Challenger disaster reduced maximum payload to low earth orbit from 27,850 kg to 24,400 kg.ĪKA: Shuttle Space Transportation System STS. The version of the space shuttle that went into production. Home - Search - Browse - Alphabetic Index: 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9Ī- B- C- D- E- F- G- H- I- J- K- L- M- N- O- P- Q- R- S- T- U- V- W- X- Y- ZĪmerican winged orbital launch vehicle.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |