Talk:Lifting body
From Academic Kids
The M-2 was a development of an earlier design in which I worked. Therefore my opinion is probably biased. However, I did receive three degrees in Engineering. In my opinion, if the X-24 design had been picked for the basis of the Space Shuttle, it would have been better. Look at the thick leading edges and compare them to the, relatively, thin edges of the shuttle. The reason for the shuttle's thin wing was to give it higher lift to drag ratio probably because it had a need for lift to alter its entry trajectory. There may, or not, have been a military requirement for this. Of course, if the launch is made in the right trajectory, there is no need for this. Perhaps if there is a follow up design...
- In order to get U.S. Air Force support (but not Air Force funding) for the Space Shuttle, NASA had to design a much larger craft than it needed. It had to add the larger 15x60 ft cargo bay and the larger cross range performance demanded by the Air Force. By doing this NASA got Air Force support before Congress for the Space Shuttle. Reubenbarton 14:26, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Is this a M2 Lifting Body?
M2LiftingBody.JPG
Yes, it is the M2-F3 (see [1] (http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/gallery/photo/M2-F2/HTML/ECN-1088.html), it has the same tail number). andy 17:42, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
