Randall Clague wrote: > > On Sun, 25 May 2003 14:49:49 -0500, John Carmack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Actually, I think most on this list are VTVL advocates, although Randall > > may have been corrupted by XCOR by now. :-) > > A fair assessment. :-) > > Given XCOR's environment and mission, HTHL is the only sensible mode. > Given ERPS' environment and mission, VTVL is the only sensible mode. Ditto > with Armadillo. It's a variation on when you have a hammer, you tend to > see nails.
The larger point here is, I think, that these things tend to turn into religious arguments... especially when abort modes become involved. IMHO, arguing about abort modes is way premature until you understand the credible failure modes. It's hard to make intelligent engineering decisions about _how_ to abort if you're just guessing as to why you may want to do so. A "single dead engine" failure, with everything else still working perfectly, seems to be taken as the "expected emergency" in many of these discussions: is that really the most likely problem motivating an abort? In other words, do we genuinely believe that combustion is temperamental, but control systems are reliable? (Looking at the history of manned space flight to date, it seems most accidents and near-accidents have involved something _other_ than the sudden total failure of "1 of N" engines to produce thrust...) -dave w _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
