Re: How Rockets Differ From Jets


Brad Guth wrote:
> tomcat,
> These folks are not actually fools, they just pretend as being unable
> to understand whatever it is that you or I have to say. It's what liars
> do best, lie their stinking butts off at the drop of another hat.
>
> There's absolutely no possible question that a CNT/basalt composite of
> SRBs, ET and even the entire shuttle/spaceplane could have been
> replaced by now at less than half the dry mass of what our existing
> format has to deal with.


I just wish they would ask 'real' questions regarding the
engineering/construction of a spaceplane, not jeer, leer, and carry on.

Perhaps, their educations are so limited they can't ask the 'right'
questions. Perhaps, they are paid to jeer, leer, and carry on.

Maybe their real 'location' is . . . certain portions of the Middle
East. Their names could have been made to look European.

To me a gigantic gleaming white spaceplane would be a sight to behold.
With 11 SSME's generating 5.5 million pounds of thrust and a cargo hold
filled with 200,000 pounds of satellites, lunar modules and the like.

The Mojave Desert would shake a little with the take off of such a
space vehicle. It would be larger than anything Edwards AFB ever had
take off.

It might even be heading for Venus, where only a composite hull of
basalt/CNT could survive. The 4 SSME's on the bottom would allow for a
VTOL landing. Or, maybe, it would drop a 200,000 pound nuke on an
asteroid heading for Earth. Or, maybe, it would be on a 2 month
journey to Pluto to establish a military outpost.

This is what is important, not jeering, leering, and carrying on.


tomcat

.