Re: Second Guessing NASA VSE
- From: henry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Henry Spencer)
- Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 03:33:54 GMT
In article <1162592465.183183.73910@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
surfduke <surfduke2001@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The Direct approach has some merit, (but), I still think a version of
Shuttle C would be the cheepest route for cargo in the short run. The
existing support hardware would be in place with little change to most
systems...
Hint: those two phrases, "existing support hardware" and "little change
to most systems", *guarantee* very high operating costs. The single
biggest problem with NASA's Ares boosters is precisely that they are not
allowed to be cheap, because they are required to preserve most of the
jobs of the existing shuttle work force.
...We still pull the SR-71's off display now and again.
Uh, no, that was basically done *once*, and it wasn't at all easy. It's
no longer practical. They're retired. "When we dropped it, it broke."
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. | henry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- References:
- Second Guessing NASA VSE
- From: Jeff Findley
- Re: Second Guessing NASA VSE
- From: surfduke
- Second Guessing NASA VSE
- Prev by Date: Re: Where have all my recent posts gone?
- Next by Date: Re: USA develops space-based weapons
- Previous by thread: Re: Second Guessing NASA VSE
- Next by thread: Re: Second Guessing NASA VSE
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|