Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- From: "Hyper" <hyperboreea@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 6 Mar 2007 13:11:51 -0800
On Mar 6, 2:45 pm, simberg.interglo...@xxxxxxxxx (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On 5 Mar 2007 22:22:53 -0800, in a place far, far away, "Totorkon"<...>
<aertr...@xxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:
Probably. In fact I suspect it could be done in five-ton increments,
as long as the cost per ton were low enough.
This would certainly keep an RLV busy for some time.
Yes, it would, but too many people have a heavy-lift fetish.
Heavy lift spares you a lot of headaches. If you think about it, a
higher price may be worth it if your station/vehicle is assembled in a
couple of flights instead of 20-30 (to say nothing about EVAs. Plus,
you can't fly large diameter components on existing launchers.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- From: Rand Simberg
- Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- From: Joe Strout
- Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- References:
- Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- From: Totorkon
- Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- From: Rand Simberg
- Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- Prev by Date: Re: Update on Zero-G's progress
- Next by Date: Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- Previous by thread: Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- Next by thread: Re: Vision of the three Rs: Regular, Reliable and Reusable
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
