Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05


Len wrote:
[snip]
>
> Before Apollo, the conventional wisdom was on the side
> of on-orbit assembly and propellant loading. IMO, we
> went down the wrong path.
Before Shuttle The Conventional Wisdom was that if we built a national
reusable 'space shuttle,' the cost of access to orbit would go down.

Before Delta IV, the Conventional Wisdom was that LOX/H2 is better than
LOX/hydrocarbon.

Before the IBM PC and networking, the conventional wisdom was that more
powerful supercomputers would eventually run the world.

the conventional wisdom is usually way wrong. Even a squirrel finds a
nut now and then, but The Conventional Wisdom tends to be dumber than
squirrels when forecasting technology.

> It is way past the time to correct
> the infrastructure problem. True enough, this will not
> happen "automagically" (good word, I like it). However,
> cheaper launches could help with respect to reforming
> the infrastructure, as well as following through on an

Infrastructure is something that costs more as it ages, and costs more
to build the longer you wait to upgrade it.

I.e. the more fluid and responsive your infrastructure is, and the more
often you upgrade it, the cheaper its use gets. With that in mind, the
very long timelines a high level reusable vehicle would require to
design, build, and fly makes the infrastructure worse off in the
meantime.
On the other hand, the quicker you you can start launching, upgrading,
and starting designing again, the better off your infrastructure will
be. That argues for quick and dirty methods to orbit, like ELVs.
Design, build, fly, upgrade, design, build, fly...much quicker to
upgrade with a throwaway system like that.

This is one of the reasons CEV is NOT stipulated to require
reusability.

They still fly 80s computers on the Shuttles, right? Not to mention the
thing was designed in the early 70s. If it takes you 10 years to design
and declare working your reusable vehicle, by the time your first
commerical satellite was delivered to orbit, the entire infrastructure
might be obsolete.

Tom

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Deficits no concern?
    ... Economists who are evaluating his statements are saying perhaps 12% ... "crumbling" infrastructure, or creating goodjobsatgoodwages, etc. ... the conventional wisdom is wrong more than ... If they'd spent more on domestic products instead of relying ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
    ... > Before Shuttle The Conventional Wisdom was that if we built a national ... >> the infrastructure problem. ... > Infrastructure is something that costs more as it ages, ... I'm not sure what you mean by a high level reusable vehicle. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Deficits no concern?
    ... "crumbling" infrastructure, or creating goodjobsatgoodwages, etc. ... Empty speculation, based on vapor, not on facts. ... I hope you're not referring to Richard. ... the conventional wisdom is wrong more than ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Deficits no concern?
    ... bleating about "infrastructure" is just cover. ... "crumbling" infrastructure, or creating goodjobsatgoodwages, etc. ... I hope you're not referring to Richard. ... and conventional wisdom to support what he says about this subject. ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: RG wants to do Ultima again
    ... I'm not sure the original design was quite that good either. ... and it seems that maybe conventional wisdom sometimes is there ... lobby in 3D for an online action game. ...
    (rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons)