headers
hvanderbilt | 1 Nov 1998 03:33
Picon

Re: X-33 Powerpack Test

RE X-33 engines - see last tuesday's LA Times.  You should be able
to find the story on their website by searching on "x-33" still.

In short, the engine is far enough behind schedule it looks like
officially pushing X-33 first flight back from July '99 to December.
(Other X-33 types are quoted as being relieved, because they're
behind schedule too.)  It's also looking like being $36 million
over budget - Jerry Rising is quoted saying he expects Rocketdyne
to cover this.  (Yeah, right.)

My take is, this story is likely on the optimistic side, from reading
between the lines and from some other things I've heard.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
The Silent Observer | 1 Nov 1998 07:09
Picon

Re: X-33 Powerpack Test

<a href="mailto:hvanderbilt <at> bix.com">hvanderbilt <at> bix.com</a> wrote:
> 
> RE X-33 engines

<snip>

> In short, the engine is far enough behind schedule it looks like
> officially pushing X-33 first flight back from July '99 to December.

<snip>

> 
> My take is, this story is likely on the optimistic side, from reading
> between the lines and from some other things I've heard.

Does anyone else see a strong resemblance here with the Shuttle program
during its design phase -- from the days when they still thought they
might get it flying in time to save Skylab?

--

-- 
 WARNING!!  This area has been designated an official DOPE FREE ZONE!!

      If you're going to be a dope, please do it somewhere else!

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer           NAR # 70141-SR Insured
Rocket Pages             <a href="http://members.aol.com/silntobsvr/launches.htm">http://members.aol.com/silntobsvr/launches.htm</a>

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
WSpaceport | 2 Nov 1998 19:05
Picon
Favicon

Re: shuttle launches amateur satellite

In a message dated 10/30/98 7:17:31 PM Pacific Standard Time, <a href="mailto:ikluft <at> cisco.com">ikluft <at> cisco.com</a>
writes:

> Does anyone know if that's the first Amateur Radio satellite (or just
amateur
>  satellite, since they mostly use Amateur Radio) launched by a shuttle?

I believe there were previously launched AMSATs (one called AMSAT 1) aboard
earlier shuttle flights.

~JS~
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jerry Durand | 2 Nov 1998 19:38
Favicon

Fwd: H2O2 Motor

Since I'm not an H2O2 person, could someone answer this person directly?  I
assume he doesn't subscribe to the list.

>From: <a href="mailto:TEdelston <at> aol.com">TEdelston <at> aol.com</a>
>Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 13:23:19 EST
>To: <a href="mailto:jdurand <at> interstellar.com">jdurand <at> interstellar.com</a>
>Subject: H2O2 Motor
>
>Jerry,
>
>I got you e-mail address of a ERPS post.  You we involved with some
>discussions of Silver Catalysts.
>
>I'm writing you regarding that subject.
>
>I have a motor that I am about to test and have some Questions regarding the
>use of off the shelf commercial grade H2O2.
>
>I can concentrate it up to 90% but have some concerns about certain
>stabilizers damaging the silver catalyst.  I also have some concerns about the
>stabilizers inhibiting total decomposition.
>
>Do you have any information on this subject or know any one that does?
>
>Please e-mail me back if you do.
>
>I'm also looking for a still.
>
>Thanks
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Wallis | 2 Nov 1998 20:14
Picon

Re: Fwd: H2O2 (Silver) Motor

Jerry wrote:

> Since I'm not an H2O2 person, could someone answer this person
> directly?  I assume he doesn't subscribe to the list.

I'll take that ...

> >From: <a href="mailto:TEdelston <at> aol.com">TEdelston <at> aol.com</a>
> >Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 13:23:19 EST
> >To: <a href="mailto:jdurand <at> interstellar.com">jdurand <at> interstellar.com</a>
> >Subject: H2O2 Motor
> >
> >Jerry,
> >
> >I got you e-mail address of a ERPS post.  You we involved with some
> >discussions of Silver Catalysts.
> >
> >I'm writing you regarding that subject.
> >
> >I have a motor that I am about to test and have some Questions
> >regarding the use of off the shelf commercial grade H2O2.
> >
> >I can concentrate it up to 90% but have some concerns about certain
> >stabilizers damaging the silver catalyst.  I also have some
> >concerns about the stabilizers inhibiting total decomposition.
> >
> >Do you have any information on this subject or know any one that
> >does?
> >
> >Please e-mail me back if you do.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
David Lautenschlager | 2 Nov 1998 20:40
Picon

Re: Fwd: H2O2 (Silver) Motor

Is there some temperature above which H2O2 will decompse without a
catalyst?

Thanks!

David Lautenschlager
Broomfield, CO
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Wallis | 2 Nov 1998 21:10
Picon

Re: Fwd: H2O2 (Silver) Motor

David Lautenschlager wrote:

> Is there some temperature above which H2O2 will decompse without a
> catalyst?

Technically, yes. But I don't believe there's one where it will
decompose in a controlled fashion if you're thinking of just heating
a vat of peroxide. 

The purpose of a catalyst is to create conditions where the peroxide
chemically splits into water and pure oxygen, using the formula:

	2 H2O2 => 2 H2O + O2
	
One of the byproducts of the reaction is a lot of heat. At 98%
concentration, you get high pressure steam and pure oxygen at about
1800 degrees F. The advantage here is that just about any hydrocarbon
fuel you inject into this stream WILL ignite! Preheating your catalyst
helps the overall catalytic reaction. Preheating the peroxide tends to
make it explode. There's no safe way to make an engine from the 
non-catalytic decomposition of peroxide.

If I remember correctly, getting peroxide above about 150 degrees F.
will tend to thermally decompose it and that generates enough heat to
not only maintain the decomposition, but rapidly accelerate it. 

Peroxide expands at about 600:1 in volume when catalysed, so what you
have is a very touchy container of liquid that tends to vastly expand
in volume in a very short order. This will "catastrophically
disassemble" any container you have your peroxide in. In other words,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
NicholasHl | 2 Nov 1998 21:47
Picon
Favicon

Re: H2O2 (Silver) Motor

In a message dated 11/2/98 7:21:45 PM GMT, you write:

<< Silver is simple, but it has many limitations. That doesn't mean it's 
 unusable. The British, in the early 70's, put a 125 kg satellite into 
 polar orbit from Womerra, Australia using a three stage vehicle 
 powered by 85% H2O2 and silver screen catalysts. It can be done. It's 
 just not the most efficent. Design that into the systems though and 
 you can deal with it. >>

The Stentor and Gamma motors were getting Isp of the order of 240-260. What
sort of Isp are you aiming at?

And kerosine was used with the peroxide. Hydrazine will give better Isp.

Nicholas Hill

[UK Space History at members.aol.com/nicholashl/ukspace/ukspace.htm]
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Henry Spencer | 2 Nov 1998 21:56

Re: H2O2 (Silver) Motor

> And kerosine was used with the peroxide. Hydrazine will give better Isp.

But only at vastly higher cost, both in dollars and in handling hazards.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       <a href="mailto:henry <at> spsystems.net">henry <at> spsystems.net</a>
                                                     <a href="mailto:(henry <at> zoo.toronto.edu)">(henry <at> zoo.toronto.edu)</a>
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Wallis | 2 Nov 1998 22:04
Picon

Re: H2O2 (Silver) Motor

Nicholas Hill wrote:

> The Stentor and Gamma motors were getting Isp of the order of
> 240-260. What sort of Isp are you aiming at?

We're aiming in the 290-300 sec range for bi-propellent operations.

> And kerosine was used with the peroxide. Hydrazine will give better
> Isp.

Yes, but hydrazine is VERY nasty stuff, as I think has been mentioned 
here. (Wasn't it Henry Spencer who said something to the effect that 
the only nice thing about hydrazine was that it wasn't radioactive?)

Keep in mind the goal is simple, efficent flight operations. This 
(IOHO) excludes using propellents as toxic as hydrazine. HTP and Jet-A 
handling are both well know and well documented and can be handled by 
reasonably confidence. Manufacturing HTP is tricky and there are 
needed precautions in storage, but they aren't nearly at the level of 
safety required with hydrazine, and the effects of a spill are minimal 
compared to the hazard of a hydrazine leak.

        Michael

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Wallis, Consultant    KF6SPF               <a href="mailto:mwallis <at> wallis..com">mwallis <at> wallis..com</a>
ESMC Project QA Lead - SunService               <a href="mailto:Michael.Wallis <at> Sun.com">Michael.Wallis <at> Sun.com</a>

Aristotle: 
"It seems that ambition makes most people wish to be loved rather
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane