More New Details on NASA's CEV Launcher Studies

TheEqualizer writes "Continuing on the NYT story on NASA's current CEV launcher plans, spaceref has an even more extensive look with detailed assessments of the available options. By all accounts, it looks like NASA is picking up where it left off with Apollo but also combining it with established Shuttle technology -- the capsule concept of the 1960s atop the shuttle boosters of the 1970s being the winning combination under the current budgetary limitations. However, is this coupling of old technology and designs really the best we can do?"

Comments

Re:OT: Mod point suddenly rare?

[a.different.perspect]

As I commented here, it probably means that no new mod points are being given out, and that only people who already have them or are editors can moderate. Well, it's an April Fools day type of Slashdot fun - that is to say that it sucks.

Re:If it ain't broke...

[jacksonj04]

Okay, since evidently the ACs still don't have the balls to even post a correction with a username, I'll reply here instead of wasting time replying individually.

Since I was talking to someone who thinks balloons can lift items past the atmosphere, I felt there was a need to somewhat simplify things.

A rocket does not *need* something to push against, but something being there for the expanding gasses to be reflected from does assist. The much used laws of Newton (every action = opposite reaction) which mean a rocket can work in space also mean that the exhaust gasses colliding with something, such as the ground, produces an equal force in the opposite direction. Spacecraft maneuver just as much by pushing against their own exhaust gasses as they do by using newton's laws.