What questions has the OTA report and the critique raised in your mind?
 

I believe OTA is merely a report-generating organization, whereas Congress makes its decisions on political and economic faxctors which may or may not be related to the OTA analyses. It therefore does not surprise me that the Big Dumb Booster never got off the ground!
- Leon Bush
- None (Retired)
 

OTA was a well-regarded organization. In their day they produced very superior reports in a wide range of technical subjects. Because of the way they treated minimum cost design and the Big Dumb Booster, I felt it imperative that I discuss in detail my relationship with OTA, and with OTA’s relationship with Congress. I hope that many more readers have recognized that Congress, for economic and political reasons, saw to it that this work would be downplayed, if not maligned, as much as possible. I wish more readers would care to express their thoughts in these Columns. Their thoughts need not coincide with mine. I am sure there are viewpoints I have been blind to or have omitted and should be aired.
- Art Schnitt
- Consultant
 

I just got through reading the report. It was very interesting, and raised many questions in my mind. I was particularly interested in the fact that graphite-epoxy tanks could be that efficient while still being relatively cheap. Also, you could really "cook with gas" if you got some RTM and fillament winding setups with the capability of making an "all composite" MCD ELV. Lighter than most, cheaper than almost all of them....Still like the idea of using an ablative phenolic insert in place of active cooling. Heck, make the thing even lighter and easier to build -- use shperical tanks. The DC-X proved that you can build an egg shaped rocket, so why not just make an ELV version. Maybe as you suggest see if the first stage is realistic to recover. All in all, it looks fascinating. They did sound rather pessimistic, but oh well.
- Jonathan Goff
- Brigham Young University

Return to Published Columns