Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable

"Eric Chomko" <pne.chomko@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:> "Eric Chomko" <pne.chomko@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:> :
:> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
:> :> "Eric Chimpko" <pne.chomko@xxxxxxxxxxx>, the turd in the punchbowl
:> :> wrote:
:> :> :
:> :> :Fred J. McCall, like a fart that doesn't stop stinking, wrote:
:> :> :> "Eric Chomko" <pne.chomko@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:> :> :> :
:> :> :> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
:> :> :> :> "Eric Chomko" <pne.chomko@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:> :> :> :> :
:> :> :> :> :I never suggested that we subsidize water in space in hopes that it
:> :> :> :> :will yield something. I'm more in favor of offering a substantial
:> :> :> :> :prize (more like a $1 billion rather than $10 million) to get a decent
:> :> :> :> :craft that is SSTO. It seems that some contractors get millions for
:> :> :> :> :offering nothing.
:> :> :> :>
:> :> :> :> Yeah. Define 'decent' in a way that someone can't design around to do
:> :> :> :> something cheap that isn't useful for what you intend.
:> :> :> :
:> :> :> :But we all know what an SSTO vehicle would be if we saw it actually
:> :> :> :work.
:> :> :>
:> :> :> Hogwash!
:> :> :
:> :> :Oh no? What would one look like that fooled us? I sure as hell would
:> :> :know what one was if I saw it.
:> :>
:> :> And yet you cannot specify just what is 'decent' and what is not.
:> :>
:> :> Since your only qualification other than SSTO is 'decent', if I build
:> :> a vehicle that is model-scale and gets itself to orbit then you pay
:> :> me. Such a vehicle is worthless for any purpose other than winning
:> :> your 'prize'.
:> :
:> :Takes off like an airplane, achieves LEO, and re-enters earth's
:> :atmosphere and lands like an airplane. THAT craft is a DECENT SSTO
:> :spacecraft.
:>
:> That's not 'SSTO', you stupid git. That's 'reusable'. They aren't
:> the same thing.
:
:The shuttle is reusable, is it SSTO?

Irrelevant.

:What is OSP. (in theory -because, you stupid old fart, I know that
:there is no flying OSP)? Reusable? SSTO? Both?

Irrelevant, since OSP isn't what you claimed your 'prize' was for
(although you're currently shifting ground to get to that point).

:>
:> :>
:> :> Now, would you care to try being just a bit more precise?
:> :>
:> :> :> What you're telling me is that you can't adequately define 'decent'.
:> :> :
:> :> :Decent means that the same craft can return to space using fuel costs
:> :> :and a small maintenance cost somewhere less than 5% of the cost of the
:> :> :vehicle.
:> :>
:> :> You appear to be confused between SSTO (which is one thing) and
:> :> 'reusable', which is a quite different thing. Neither one requires
:> :> that the other also be true.
:> :
:> :True. But what good is SSTO that isn't reusable in the context of
:> :CATS?
:>
:> It doesn't matter "what good" it is. IT'S NOT WHAT YOU SAID WAS
:> NEEDED TO WIN THE PRIZE!
:>
:> Are you starting to get my point yet, Eric?
:
:No. Do you have a point other than claiming I'm stupid? Which is ad
:hominem in nature and off the topic of SSTO, reusable and what a true
:OSP is. Get it?

My 'point' is that you claimed that some 'prize' should be offered for
a 'decent' SSTO vehicle and then refused to define what the hell
'decent' means.

It's clear why they don't let you play with money, Eric.

:> :>
:> :> Which one are you offering the prize for?
:> :
:> :The one that takes off like a plane and goes to LEO and returns and
:> :then can do it again for fuel cost plus less than 5% of the vehicle
:> :cost.
:>
:> Yet another requirement - now it has to take off horizontally, too?
:
:No, but there is advantage to that as it can take off and land at any
:large airport (i.e. Wright-Patterson) and not require launch pad
:support (i.e Cape Canaveral)

And DCX, which doesn't suit your criteria because it neither takes off
nor lands horizontally, doesn't need your large airport, either.
Pretty much any parking lot will do. So what?

:>
:> :Make one Freddy and I'll make you rich!
:>
:> You haven't a clue what YOU even want, Eric. How you going to make ME
:> rich?
:
:I would know if I saw it work. You wouldn't need much payload.
:Probably about 1/4 of what the shuttle carries or less.

Yeah, there's an offer people are willing to invest large sums of
money in. "Bring Eric a rock and if it's a rock he likes you win the
prize."

:> :>
:> :> :> :>
:> :> :> :> This is why contracting is hard and not left to amateurs, Eric.
:> :> :> :
:> :> :> :I have seen amateurs turn into top-notch professional contractors
:> :> :> :during my 26 years in the aerospace business. Yes Freddy, 26 years.
:> :> :>
:> :> :> So you have a long record of learning nothing?
:> :> :
:> :> :Ha, says you! I would not have been doing this this long if I hadn't
:> :> :learned a thing or two, McClod.
:> :>
:> :> Of course you would! If you'd learned things, you'd have been
:> :> promoted and be doing quite different things.
:> :
:> :But I have.
:>
:> Then you lied above when you said "doing this this long", since 'this'
:> apparently doesn't mean to you what it means to the rest of the
:> English speaking world.
:
:McClod, I am not the best computer programmer in the world, just
:better than you. And if not, then close enough to have you eat words
:of me being stupid. I can prove it.

Of course you can, dear boy. Of course you can...

<snicker>

--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast