Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ll-xn!adelie!axiom!linus!alliant!gottlieb From: gottlieb@alliant.UUCP (Bob Gottlieb) Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space Subject: Another (quick) satellite launch capability Message-ID: <338@alliant.UUCP> Date: Thu, 23-Oct-86 23:06:45 EDT Article-I.D.: alliant.338 Posted: Thu Oct 23 23:06:45 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 25-Oct-86 06:56:48 EDT Reply-To: gottlieb@alliant.UUCP (Bob Gottlieb) Organization: Alliant Computer Systems, Acton, MA Lines: 44 Xref: watmath sci.space.shuttle:3 sci.space:46 With all this talk about no expendable boosters around to put satellites into orbit, I was thinking: what about the (remaining) Titan II missiles used by the USAF as ICBMS in silos in Arkansas? They are being decommissioned - there have been several failures due to leaks causing fires, explosions, etc. So why not use the ones remaining? Pros: o The missiles take 1/2 hour to fuel, so their military usefulness is limited at best (first strike, anyone?) o They don't have to be moved; just remove the warhead bus and replace with a satellite & shroud & ... (I didn't say this was free or even cheap; just available soon) Cons: o Are they reliable enough to use as satellite launchers? o Would the Soviets be nervious if they saw a (single) launch of a Titan II into circum-polar orbit? [i.e., would they think it's a pin-down strike?] o Military: We can't spare a single missile. Unknowns: o Cargo weight of a Titan II to LEO? to GSO? o Time to build a housing for a satellite for the Titan II? Anyway, if anyone knows more about this than I (That is to say, any real facts), I would be curious about this. -- -- Bob Gottlieb UUCP: ...!linus!alliant!gottlieb Mail: Alliant Computer Systems Corp, 42 Nagog Park, Acton, MA 01720 Phone: (617) 263-9110 Foot: "You can't get there from here". --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I don't know what I'm doing, and Alliant isn't responsible either, so there!"