[AR] Re: catalyst additives (was Re: arocket Digest V4 #187)
- From: Henry Spencer <hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Arocket List <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 23:57:34 -0400 (EDT)
On Sun, 14 Aug 2016, John Dom wrote:
...Concorde flew for many years. It should still be flying since it was
beyond competition and faster than any other airliner to this day!
The one thing it had trouble with, alas, was what it was built for, like
every other airliner: making money for its owners. It was grounded by
said owners -- British Airways and Air France -- not by stupid politicians
or public protest. When in routine operation, it made only a small profit
(despite premium fares, no competition, and usually flying full) because
of the high costs of maintaining a small fleet of old high-tech aircraft.
The prestige of being Concorde operators added something to that, but
there were limits. The prolonged grounding after the Paris crash drove it
deep into the red, and the combination of an ill-timed recession and the
impending scheduled mid-life overhauls for the fleet led its owners to
conclude that it would not be profitable again any time soon.
(There are some obvious morals for would-be rocketship operators...)
Also: LOL reading American J. Clark's Ignition! biased chapter 5
"Peroxide always a bridesmaid" got married after the Prospero success.
More like a one-night stand, alas. The Black Arrow program had already
been canceled; whether it succeeded or failed, the Prospero launch was to
be the last.
Probably the Russians did launch big HTP rockets or tested them. At one
Farnborough exhibition (1994?) I saw a huge Russian HTP biprop engine
hanging on cables in an exhibition hall once. It did not look new.
As far as I know, there was never a major Russian rocket using peroxide
for primary propulsion (as opposed to pump drive). Korolev used
LOX/kerosene, and the other ICBM builders used N2O4/UDMH. I have to
wonder whether the engine you saw wasn't simply mislabeled.
Henry
Other related posts:
