@ziurke666 besides, how it will roll depends from how the weight is distributed in it. In theory making it like that allows it to suffer a lower thermal load, and thus have a lighter reentry shield.
@ziurke666 In case you haven't noticed, this is going to be a flight demonstrator, to test and learn more about how a controlled reentry is done. It is an experiment, not a space vehicle with a payload.
The lessons learned from it will then be used to build something that looks less like a Shuttle and more like a modern space capsule.
esa.int/esaMI/Launchers_Technology/SEMDPQ2PGQD_1.ht ml
Because now the objective is going in space and DOING IT WELL, not just outdo the Reds to the Moon.
2. ESA will not launch it before testing it fully...and even then, the first flights will be cargo and after proven reliable the shuttle will be manned.
3.Romania and other EU countrie arent yet in ESA(atm only 10-12 members are in)
Looks like seriously outdated project. Even USSR had a shuttle in 70's and that's a rocket with funky capsule design. Landing on side not on bottom (big deal), these flaps looks dangerous (can couse rotation and landing on thermally unprotected capsule surface), older "bottom landing" design seems to me was more successful it could land not only on water. Gagarin was in almost the same capsule 50 years ago. By the way its European space ship, why there is no Romania flag on it?
I agree. The design has a bit to be desired. I think it could use a big huge laser gun on it, bitching flames on the side, oh yeah and angel wings like a Gundum. Ever watch that..Gundum wing...I think I made a mistake writing this.
Yep, looks like it will roll over then burn up. Without the open wing design it is prone to rolling and those flimsy flaps are asking for trouble. The double parachute design is poor too whole thing is a bad idea.
@ziurke666 besides, how it will roll depends from how the weight is distributed in it. In theory making it like that allows it to suffer a lower thermal load, and thus have a lighter reentry shield.
bobafetthotmail 8 months ago
@ziurke666 In case you haven't noticed, this is going to be a flight demonstrator, to test and learn more about how a controlled reentry is done. It is an experiment, not a space vehicle with a payload.
The lessons learned from it will then be used to build something that looks less like a Shuttle and more like a modern space capsule.
esa.int/esaMI/Launchers_Technology/SEMDPQ2PGQD_1.ht ml
Because now the objective is going in space and DOING IT WELL, not just outdo the Reds to the Moon.
bobafetthotmail 8 months ago
1. USSR did not have a project like this.
2. ESA will not launch it before testing it fully...and even then, the first flights will be cargo and after proven reliable the shuttle will be manned.
3.Romania and other EU countrie arent yet in ESA(atm only 10-12 members are in)
Kamadeva01 2 years ago
Looks like seriously outdated project. Even USSR had a shuttle in 70's and that's a rocket with funky capsule design. Landing on side not on bottom (big deal), these flaps looks dangerous (can couse rotation and landing on thermally unprotected capsule surface), older "bottom landing" design seems to me was more successful it could land not only on water. Gagarin was in almost the same capsule 50 years ago. By the way its European space ship, why there is no Romania flag on it?
ziurke666 2 years ago
I agree. The design has a bit to be desired. I think it could use a big huge laser gun on it, bitching flames on the side, oh yeah and angel wings like a Gundum. Ever watch that..Gundum wing...I think I made a mistake writing this.
100stonecloud100 2 years ago 2
that's what she said
flip9388 3 years ago
Yep, looks like it will roll over then burn up. Without the open wing design it is prone to rolling and those flimsy flaps are asking for trouble. The double parachute design is poor too whole thing is a bad idea.
Kysen100 3 years ago
The flaps concern me.
GuiltySpark347 3 years ago