Xref: utzoo sci.space.shuttle:3940 sci.space:15078
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!sjsca4!bach!jones
From: jones@bach (Clark Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle SRB exhaust gas makeup.
Keywords: SRB, Luddites
Message-ID: <1989Oct27.171535.7189@sj.ate.slb.com>
Date: 27 Oct 89 17:15:35 GMT
References: <8910231952.AA14411@decwrl.dec.com> <1989Oct24.163114.29924@utzoo.uucp> <572@milton.acs.washington.edu> <1989Oct25.024533.14584@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: jones@bach.UUCP (Clark Jones)
Organization: Schlumberger ATE, Tempe, AZ
Lines: 25

Given all of the nasties that come out of the tail end of a working SRB, it is
kind of suprising that the Luddites haven't tried to shut down the STS program
on the basis of the airpollution generated.  After thinking about some of
that stuff, I think I'll skip watching a launch in person for fear of being
downwind.  :-)

Actually, it might not be such a bad idea if the Luddites could get NASA to
abandon the SRBs.  Only a critter as stupid as Congress would go for that
unreliable a system in the first place.  ;-)

BTW, anyone besides me remember the saga of the Little Joe II?  It was a solid
fuel rocket designed to be used in testing the Apollo escape tower.  One high-
up NASA official said it was "the most reliable rocket we've built".  The
third (and final) launch produced a shattered charge about 7 sec. before
scheduled escape tower ignition, generating a much more realistic test of the
escape system than NASA had planned.  (They counted it a "successful test"!)
IMHO, the ONLY place that manned solid rockets belong are in ejection seats,
and then you put in a dozen or so, and as long as 75% or so fire when you
"pull", and NONE fire when you _DON'T_ "pull", you're OK.  You can even
tollerate a couple of them shattering while in use.

						Clark

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are mine and not those of Schlumberger
because they are NOT covered by the patent agreement!