Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: BradGuth <bradguth@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:20:34 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 21, 1:56 pm, Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Dec 21, 4:22 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Monkey Clumps wrote:
Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Considering that Boeing spent less than $100 million to develop the
747 LCV which did push the structural technology envelope, more than I
am talking about, I would say that an estimate of $2.4 is reasonable.
Umm... that was a modification to an existing design. A Mach 3, 450
passenger, hydrogen powered commercial airliner has no precedent. How
many active service airplanes today can reach Mach 3 in a sprint? I am
guessing zero. You would be lucky if it only cost 24 billion to
develop an airliner that can cruise at Mach 3.
Depends on the details.
Evasive non-answer noted.
Graham
I realize Graham that in your mind, a direct concise answer may be
viewed as being evasive. However, I am curious. What is it about the
the statement, "development costs depend on the details of the
development cycle" don't you really understand? (along with an 80
page NASA review of precisely WHAT details seem to correlate with WHAT
costs)
lol. You freak.
You very much deserve the likes of Eeyore, as you're actually two
highly qualified though each mindset rusemasters of a kind. Too bad
your denial is always in such denial.
- Brad Guth -
.
- References:
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- From: Willie . Mookie
- Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- Prev by Date: Re: "To the ordinary guy, all this is a bunch of gobbledygook"...
- Next by Date: Re: "To the ordinary guy, all this is a bunch of gobbledygook"...
- Previous by thread: Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- Next by thread: Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|