Re: SPACE PRIZE

From: Jeff Findley (jeff.findley_at_ugs.nojunk.com)
Date: 07/23/04 

Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:22:02 -0400

"Renee Keller" <kellerr13@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:WuYLc.9766$f4.9057@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Jeff Findley" <jeff.findley@ugs.nojunk.com> wrote in message
> news:utTLc.4679$oB6.3900@fe37.usenetserver.com...
> >
> > #1, quit top posting. It's annoying and against Usenet etiquette.
> >
>
> Sorry. I was always one to hate that too. But the more modern news
readers
> often put the cursor at the top of the message when you select reply
instead
> of at the bottom. Another example of technology going backwards.

If my "more modern" you mean Microsoft, I'm in the same boat. I simply
scroll to the bottom so I don't top post.

> > #2, if you're going to quote someone, quit trimming out the lines that
> > indicate who said what. Again, this is annoying and against Usenet
> > etiquette.
> >
>
> Sorry, I usually tell who replied by the thread postings, and I usually
just
> figure eveeryone is only interested in the content of the message. I
> didin't stop to think that others might not do it that way.

I suppose I'm an "old timer", since I've been around sci.space (pre-split)
since 1988 or so. Of course, many prominent posters here were "old timers"
back then.

> > #3, your ideas of how to make spacecraft "popular" are at odds with
> > designing spacecraft that are cost effective. If HTHL SSTO vehicles
were
> > easy, NASA would be flying them. If air breathing hypersonic engines
were
> > easy, the would be more than a research topic.
> >
> Are you sure about that? It is government. I work for government and know
> for a fact there is huge waste, mostly because of the complexities in
> managing it. One of the biggest problems government has is in organizing
> information in a way that is easy to understand and work with.

Point of fact, there are no known operational hypersonic, air breathing
engines in existence anywhere on the planet.

> I have seen other post mention that VTOL/VTVL type craft would be better.
I
> might agree if it were a flying saucer, or the "Millenium Falcon", but if
we
> are talking about Apollo type of craft, then no matter how advanced it
> really is, it does not look advanced.

Looks don't matter. Cost does. Cruise ships (on the outside, which is what
you are talking agbout) today don't look much more modern than ones from 50
years ago. They're still the same basic design. The same goes for jet
aircraft. Today's passenger airlines don't look much different than the
Boeing 707. This does not stop people from buying tickets on cruise ships
and airliners. What seems to matter more than outside appearance is the
comfort and features of the interior. Those have improved greatly on both
cruise ships and airliners and more directly impact passenger satisfaction
than how "cool" the outside looks.

> When we think about the time,
> materials, equipment, staff and money that will be required to set it up
and
> get it to a launch pad, we are talking about a huge expense just in
overhead
> cost for each launch.

There is no reason that a properly designed VTVL SSTO couldn't land and take
off from the same spot. Even if it had to be moved, there is no reason to
change it from a vertical to horizontal position. It would be a relatively
simple operation to attach wheels to the landing legs and roll it into a
vertical servicing facility in much the same way that aircraft are moved
around airports.

> On the other hand, a HTHL vehicle could use an
> airport, in a number of locations. Taxi to the runway, taker off, land.
If
> it becomes popular it could be launched from "an Airport near you".
Instead
> of you going someplace or building a facility near you.

You're worrying about things that impact cost very little. HTHL vehicles
have quite a bit of mass tied up in landing gear. Landing gear that must
support the fully fueled weight of the vehicle for take-off and landings
during launch aborts. HTHL vehicles also have quite a bit of mass tied up
in large wings (to permit HTHL to work), which are absolutely useless once
you're above the atmosphere.

You're going to need rocket engines to get into orbit anyway, why not use
them from the beginning and take off vertically? This saves cost by
eliminating things like wings and airbreathing engines. Elimination of this
complexity is more important than handwaving arguments about vehicles being
easier to service if they're horizontal (especially since modern aircraft
can't be services without lifts anyway. It's alwfully hard to work on a
747's engines without a lift.

> > #4, just because you desire aircraft like operations, doesn't mean that
> your
> > spacecraft has to be HTHL anymore than automobiles ought to look like
> > aircraft to have similar ease of operation.
> >
>
> The upfront development cost would certainly be more expensive, but the
> running overhead cost are already much MUCH lower.

I agree about development costs (which scales with complexity of the
design), but disagree about operational costs being lower simply because a
vehicle is HTHL instead of VTVL. The more complex HTHL vehicle may be
cheaper to operate, but it's also likely that it will be more expensive due
to the increased complexity of the equipment to maintain.

Jeff 

-- 
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

Relevant Pages

  • Hybrids are worse polluters than gas guxxling 4x4s
    ... CNW Research have done a report on 'dust to dust' energy costs of vehicles, ... By the time you get to the CR-V at 1.478 it is less than half the energy cost ... finish the test with a flat battery. ...
    (uk.transport)
  • Re: Ford bail out
    ... cars and they all cost millions to design and build. ... Cobalts do you think will be sold in 2009? ... try to market laughably bad vehicles either. ...
    (rec.autos.sport.nascar)
  • Re: What was the biggest problem for each of the 2 destroyed US space shuttles?
    ... >of lighter than air vehicles. ... if the huge R&D cost was taken out of the ... VentureStar would have a marginal payload capability. ... we've learned from operating the STS; but there is an upper limit to ...
    (sci.space.history)
  • Re: Chevy Impala Dallas Police Cars
    ... Vehicles to a fleet are just one more ... No manufacturer domestic or import can touch the Interceptor in total cost ... While the FWD certified police cars cost ...
    (alt.autos.toyota)
  • Re: Ford bail out
    ... cars and they all cost millions to design and build. ... Ford has also sold about a bazillion Mustangs as well. ... So what vehicles do sell? ... If the new President appoints some sort of Car Czar that person had better ...
    (rec.autos.sport.nascar)