Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!mordor!joyce!ames!ucsd!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!cat.cmu.edu!dep
From: dep@cat.cmu.edu (David Pugh)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: space news from Aug 15 AW&ST
Message-ID: <2961@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 13 Sep 88 00:32:20 GMT
References: <1988Sep12.032459.25617@utzoo.uucp> <972@netxcom.UUCP>
Sender: netnews@pt.cs.cmu.edu
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 23

In article <972@netxcom.UUCP> ewiles@netxcom.UUCP (Edwin Wiles) writes:
>If so, these engines could be recovered in orbit, for use in 'scooters'.
>Some sort of small craft that didn't need much in the way of thrust, so
>that they could be run at something like 10% (or less) of their normal
>thrust.  If the Shuttle-C would have OMS engines as well, these would be
>even more useful in this capacity.  The SSMEs being used for larger
>versions, and the OMSs being used for smaller 1 or 2 man versions.

I don't think this would work, for several reasons. First, the SSMEs
probably have some minimum thrust (10%?). Even 10% of a SSME would
give a scooter quite a kick. Might not be a bad idea to use them for
an OTV, though -- just park it next to the space station and use it
(once) to put something heavy into a Clarke orbit or (here's hoping)
a lunar or escape orbit. Another problem is that SSMEs need a lot
of maintenance after a launch -- which the space station isn't equiped
to provide.

Not to say this isn't a good idea, however. Perhaps we could sell
SSMEs to the Soviets for use in building their solar power satellites,
manned mars missions, etc..
-- 

						David Pugh
						....!seismo!cmucspt!cat!dep