Can anyone pinpoint the institution that killed MCD and the MCD/SLV? Should it be revived in the light of the large number of US commercial satellite programs and foreign competition in launch vehicles?
 

I would like to say thank you Mr. Schnitt for this column. It is very informative and inspiring. It also unfortunately shows how the government and people can negatively react when someone starts "rocking the boat". How does Robert Truex's Sea Dragon concept fall into the history of MCD? Thank you, Scott Pearson
- Scott Pearson
 

Scott Pearson: This is in reply to your comment and question......Your comment is gratifying and very much appreciated.......With respect to your question, sometime in the 60s I learned of Robert Truax and that he was thinking along the the same lines as the MCD criteria. At that time he was head of advanced planning (if my memory serves me correctly) at Aerojet General. I invited myself to visit with him and learned what he had done experimentally and his views toward design. He was using some of the concepts upon which the MCD criteria is based. We had several subsequent visits. As I stated in the Aerospace report, “Proposed Minimum Cost Space Launch Vehicle System,” p. 3-17, I considered the first stage of an advanced version of the MCD/SLV to be sea recoverable, as “suggested by the ‘Sea Dragon’ study (Ref. (5).” The reference describes some of Truax’s work. I am still a proponent of the cost-effectiveness of this approach and I hope that some organization makes use of his knowledge and experience.
- Artthur Schnitt
- Consultant


Return to Published Columns