I suppose it's a question of whether we really have hit on a fairly optimal shape for the purpose, or just are stuck at ground zero.
It would have been pretty horrifying if in 1945, we were still flying airplanes the looked the same as in 1910.
On the other hand, commercial airliners in 2005 look essentially the same as they did in 1970. Why? Because by that point we'd arrived at pretty good shapes for high-subsonic turbine-powered flight by tens to a few hundred passengers.
Of course, the avionics and engines of a brand-new airliner are WAY ahead of what we had in 1970, just as the systems inside the CEV are (hopefully) much advanced.
A basic cone seems pretty reasonable for what is essentially an up-and-back crew transfer vehicle. Now, that that's all we're looking for in 2005 is kinda sad.....
Space/Science » in reply to re: That's really cool, but...
re: That's really cool, but...
