Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- From: simberg.interglobal@xxxxxxxxx (Rand Simberg)
- Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 05:47:28 GMT
On 4 Oct 2005 19:35:02 -0700, in a place far, far away, "Will McLean"
<mclean1382@xxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:
>> >Which in turn leads to other questions. Once one has decided "what",
>> >the next one is "how". "How much will it cost" comes after that.
>>
>> Yes, but NASA has done it bassackwards. They've figured out how
>> they're going to get people there first, and not worrying about what
>> they'll actually do there until much later.
>
>
>What makes you think they haven't? The plan is explictly geared to
>allow a fairly robust lunar presence: up to 20 tonne payloads landed on
>the surface per cargo flight, and an outpost that can be occupied as
>long as desired supported by crewed flights every six months.
One man's "robust presence," is another's "Apollo 2.0."
.
- References:
- Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- From: Ed Kyle
- Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- From: Henry Spencer
- Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- From: Allen Thomson
- Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- From: Pat Flannery
- Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- From: Allen Thomson
- Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- From: Rand Simberg
- Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- From: Will McLean
- Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- Prev by Date: Re: commercial uses of the Dtick and the Heavy Lifter
- Next by Date: Re: Shuttle vs Kliper
- Previous by thread: Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- Next by thread: Re: Stick/CEV Propulsion News
- Index(es):