Yes, but if NASA had of gone with the pressure fed liquid boosters instead of the solids, then the story would have been way different.
And that was a political decision by Nixon.
von Braun originally proposed in the early 1950's that his large booster was to be completely reusable, with parachute recovery for its stages.
He considered this for the Saturn 1, if memory serves, but then abandoned it early on, as it just would not work.
von Braun realized in the early 1960's that the Saturn 5 was too expensive, and had H.H. Koelle design a really sweet small shuttle. But then the military came along, and they needed a larger payload, and would not support anything smaller.
Space/Science » in reply to The Space Shuttle is a technical and pro-space promotion failure
Yes, but...
The whole thread (18 posts)
- Cosmis Log eye-opener. "HOW SAFE IS THE SHUTTLE?"
- re: Cosmis Log eye-opener. "HOW SAFE IS THE SHUTTLE?"
- Let's look at the 2 failures
- re: Cosmis Log eye-opener. "HOW SAFE IS THE SHUTTLE?"
- An unmanned shuttle. (Take a deep breath, let it out, do it again.)
- not with the old electronics and wiring
- The words "safe" and "shuttle" have never really belonged together
- re: An unmanned shuttle. (Take a deep breath, let it out, do it again.)
- An unmanned shuttle. (Take a deep breath, let it out, do it again.)
- re: Cosmis Log eye-opener. "HOW SAFE IS THE SHUTTLE?"
