Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- From: fairwater@xxxxxxxxx (Derek Lyons)
- Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 02:43:56 GMT
henry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Henry Spencer) wrote:
>>>A modest manned spacecraft with a bit of cargo capacity and the ability
>>>to fly cheaply and frequently could do an excellent job of station resupply.
>>
>>Unless we need to fly up any heavy components... Like a CMG.
>
>Something like a CMG is not "heavy" in the sense of requiring a dedicated
>Atlas V Heavy launch. Said modest manned spacecraft should be designed --
>such designs have been done in the past -- to be able to trade off
>passenger capacity for cargo capacity, with enough total payload mass to
>carry the singlest largest item that might be needed for repair/resupply.
Which, in this instance, requires considerably more than a 'modest'
spacecraft.
But, to admit that actual thought has to be performed in advance on
cargo issues is extraordinarily hard for many. It's easier to just
handwave.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- From: John Doe
- Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- From: Henry Spencer
- Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- References:
- Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- From: Herb Schaltegger
- Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- From: John Doe
- Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- From: Henry Spencer
- Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- From: Derek Lyons
- Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- From: Henry Spencer
- Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- Prev by Date: DART nearly a bullseye
- Next by Date: Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- Previous by thread: Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- Next by thread: Re: Perhaps there's hope for NASA yet
- Index(es):