Could be related to size economies.  I don't know how much foam they
have to add, but perhaps the extra 2-10 inches diameter are needed for
extra LOx, but can't be added interior for shipping/assembling reasons.

Or it could simply be a cost cutting feature of the tank.

-Adam

Peter L. Peres wrote:

>I was thinking about something. Why don't they put the insulation inside
>the tanks instead of outside ? It would have to be inert in contact with
>LoX but such things exist. If at least the top side of the tank would have
>the insulation foamed on the inside the risk of banging pieces against the
>shuttle would be lower, no ? There are these new substances (like glass
>foam) that would probably work. There is also the trick of not using
>insulation. I think that the big rockets used for Apollo missions did not
>have insulation on the first stage, just an air space, and they just
>boiled fuel off all the time until launch. Am I wrong ?
>
>Peter
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
>ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.
>
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body