Adrian Tymes wrote:
Yes, N+2 is what I intended -- "separate crew for each truck" meant a separate truck crew, not a whole separate launch crew. Which also fits with the "line crew" model for the fueling trucks.Donald Qualls wrote: > ISTM (from the standpoint of someone who's never actually worked on a > liquid fuel test or launch, just to be clear) that if you need three > people to work the actual launch, you need at least one more to drive > the fuel truck and connect and disconnect the hoses. And safety would > suggest you really ought to have separate trucks for fuel and oxidizer, > if you're running a bipropellant system, which makes it much more > efficient to have separate crews for the two trucks (even if the crew is > one person each).I don't quite get this last part. If you need N people for the launch crew - inspecting the rocket for damage, making sure the flight coordinates are properly set, loading the cargo/passengers and crew, et cetera - why would these functions be replicated on each of the two fuel trucks? You'd have one person to drive the oxidizer truck and connect/disconnect its hoses when it's parked, plus one more to do the same for the fuel truck. Everyone else is needed at the rocket or at the control tower, regardless of where the two trucks are. So, this would seem to argue for N+2, not (N+1)*2.
--
What you own is your own kingdom, what you do is your own glory.
What you love is your own power, and what you live is your own story.
-- Neil Peart, 1976
Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer NAR # 70141-SR Insured
Rocket Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/launches.htm
Telescope Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/astronomy.htm
Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm
Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.
_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
