At 11:42 PM 5/31/2002 -0700, you wrote: >John Carmack wrote: > > > > > > You are running ahead of us, but not too much. We are on our fifth drum of > > peroxide now. > >Well, that's just the _latest_ batch of empties, we've gone through >about 10 or 12 altogether :) >
I concede. We won't have that much run time until next year... > > >Incidentally, the EZ-Rocket with both engines going is a high S-1400 > > >system; modest thrust but long duration. The propellant cost are about > > >equal to the labor cost of maintaining and operating the aircraft. > > > > Shouldn't dual 400 lbf engines be a total of 3500 N thrust? > >Yeah, I brainfaded and listed only one engine's worth, and we're only >operating them at about 80% of design thrust (never bothered to ream out >the orifices for higher thrust since it seemed a tad overpowered >anyway). > >Doug Jones What, you are telling us that your 400 pounds thrust engines are really 320 pound thrust engines? A tad disingenuous. And come on, don't you really want "grossly overpowered" in your rocket plane? :-) John Carmack _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
