Path: utzoo!linus!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!lll-tis!lll-lcc!lll-winken!uunet!mcvax!ukc!its63b!bob
From: bob@its63b.ed.ac.uk (ERCF08 Bob Gray)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Shuttle's Future?
Message-ID: <966@its63b.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 9 Feb 88 12:26:39 GMT
References: <191800002@trsvax> <1988Feb3.140727.13026@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: bob@its63b.ed.ac.uk (ERCF08 Bob Gray)
Organization: I.T. School, Univ. of Edinburgh, U.K.
Lines: 25

In article <1988Feb3.140727.13026@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>> Does anyone know the current status of plans to replace the SRBs with liquid
>> rocket boosters?
>
>What plan?  They're doing some more paper studies, that's all.

Somewhere, at the back of my memory, I remember an article on
development work being done by the DoD on SRBs using
composite materials to reduce their weight. This was
supposed to make it easier to launch polar orbiting missions
from Vandenberg.

This was about three or four years ago, before challenger.
Does anyone know what happened to this work?

And if work has been done on this, why hasn't that work been
used in the SRB re-design. Other than not being done by MT,
that is.

FOOTNOTE: There has been speculation here that thanks to the
presidential elections, it would be politically unacceptable
to risk re-launching the shuttle. Remember the weather will be
getting cold again, if there is any more delay in the launch
schedule, and no-one will be willing to risk annother
explosion just before the new president is elected.
	Bob.