Slashdot Mirror

Ugh ....
Maryland - Goddard Space Flight Center
New Mexico - AF Research Lab - Space Vehicles, Sandia Labs, Los Alamos Labs
Colorado - Ball, Raytheon, etc
California - JPL, Livermore Labs and way too many others to list
Virginia - Navy Research Lab, Wallops Island
Texas - UT Dallas, Texas A&M, Johnson Space Center, many more
Arizona - Orbital Sciences Corp., GD, etc
Tennessee - Oakridge
Alabama - U.S. Space and Rocket Center
Utah -Space Dynamics Laboratory, L3
Florida - Kennedy, ATK and many more
Alaska - Kodiak Island

The space industry is spread out over the entire country. This list could go on and on. Saying it is only Florida and Texas that benefit is mildly absurd. I agree with the idea, but it isn't nearly as narrow as that.

MANY people watched the explosion because of the presence of the school teacher. The shuttle (or booster rockets) exploded all right. And it is generally assumed that the crew may have survived this but died on impact of the cockpit to the ground/sea. Engineers at Thiokol opposed he launch because THEY KNEW IT WOULD FAIL. The O-rings were not rated for the low temperature. The launch was pushed by (NASA) managers and Thiokol changed their recommendation not to lose a big customer.

Instead of using the same module for crew and cargo (the shuttle), there will be two totally separate launch vehicles. In both cases, the only thing that would be reusable is the solid rocket boosters (unless the crew capsule is also reusable). Is it a surprise that ATK Thiokol is the contractor for the SRBs' motors?

In the initial cargo implementations, they'd still have problems with foam debris, but that's a problem only if the cargo module is designed to safely reenter. The final cargo proposal would end up using an external tank with two shuttle engines mated to the bottom, and I doubt the current ET is designed to deal with that kind of stress. So the final cargo design will require some significant redesign by Lockheed Martin.

I'm not entirely certain the reusability of the SRBs save that much money since they have to be closely inspected and recertified between uses. But they are the most powerful in existence--each providing 3.3 mil lb of thrust. Why not reuse the design?

I did find the FAQ on their website a bit disingenuous:

"In the case of Challenger, the SRB did not suffer a catastrophic failure, but the leaking hot gas interacted with the rest of the vehicle, which resulted in the loss of Challenger and her crew."

Not exactly system-level thinking. Certainly the same "leaking hot gas" would have resulted in loss of cargo in their new proposal, but whether it would have caused loss of crew in their CEV is unknown.

I would hope that it would take on more the flavor of the old time passenger cruise lines of the late 19th & early 20th Centuries. Still, once space travel starts to really emerge, it is going to be a very capital intensive business. Almost all of the capital that Wall Street & other exchanges can dig up is going to help fuel this next economic expansion.

I predict that over the next 15-25 years you will see Wall Street (especially once the X-Prize has been won) get into space in a major way. You will see the whole dot Bomb thing happen all over again, unfortunately, with fly-by-night companies that do little but promise the Moon (this time in a more litteral fashion). Some companies are going to emerge and become very successful, but many others are going to take a whole lot of money from people and throw it down the drain.

If the X-Prize team list is an indication with over 26 different teams listed, once it has been proven to be a practical business you will see many others jump into the business. Companies like Boeing, Airbus, and Thiokol (all companies you seemed to miss) are more than likely going to come in and join the party as well. They all have some sort of rocketry/avaition experience, deep pockets, and an aire of respectability when they start producing spacecraft.

In this regard it would be more like the P.C. industry, where it started in a bunch of garages and small industrial parks, where several millionaires arose from relatively modest beginnings. In this case we have a few "modest" millionaires who are perhaps going to turn this into billions.

I found the original company that was working on the OICW program, since they are currently producing a rifle called the XM29 I would guess they won the contract.

XM29 Page

also an overview of the oicw at hkpro along with some nice photos.

About those anti-personel rocket launchers, we're closer than you may think. The OICW (the next-generation combat weapon being tested for deployment throughout the armed services) includes a computer-aimed grenade launcher which is smart enough to compute a perfect air-burst over a designated target, and which can handle a range of ammunition types.