From: den Otter (neosapient@geocities.com)
Date: Wed May 26 1999 - 17:18:48 MDT
----------
> From: Doug Jones <random@qnet.com>
>
> Spike Jones wrote:
> >
> > Wait a minute Doug. When I heard that Rotary Rocket planned to man
> > the *first* roton, I nearly choked. I understand the reasoning behind
> > centrifugal pressurization and even autogyro landing, but the notion
> > of making the experimental vehicle manned, well the logic utterly
> > escapes me.
>
> The nutshell answer is, unmanned aerial vehicles fail about 2000
> times more often than manned vehicles, basically for lack of a human
> on the spot to make the right decision in an emergency.
I wonder what kind of safety precautions have been taken to
protect the crew in case of an accident (or is this highly classified)?
Liquid/gel buffers (or air bags) in combination with 'cocoon seats',
fire-proof layers, a titanium shell around the crew compartment etc.
could presumably make the vehicle very safe indeed (at moderately
higher cost).The design of regular rockets and the space shuttle would
permit even better safety measures, like a crew compartment that
automatically "ejects" in case of a mishap (a la Challenger), and
gently floats back to earth. For some strange reason, this part of the
design has always been neglected. Similar techniques could be
used for VIP transport in planes btw.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:49 MST