Re: Water Fuel Rocket Science

tomcat,
Try for once getting a freaking honest clue before getting yourself out
of bed next time.
I can't understand why the trillions haven't begun coming in. I keep
waiting. I am offering to build a SSTO/SSTP for 8 billion U.S.
dollars, up front, and no one has negotiated with me. A little
titanium, some vacuum, some air pressure, a layer or two of composite,
some ceramic, add on some SSMEs and -- 'Presto' -- the SSTO/SSTP
exists.

You know, taking the GLOW to .25 Thrust to Weight may make sense. The
dry weight must remain very light, but added fuel does two things. It
puts the SSTO/SSTP at a higher altitude when Thrust to Wegiht
approaches 2 and 3 to 1.

You obviously haven't established squat as to that honest clue, as to
the ongoing ruse/sting of our Saturn 5, being that it was so terribly
inert massive seems to indicate that if going by way of your own
NASA/Apollo Koran, in that such inert mass apparently doesn't actually
mean squat. At least that's what lord/wizard William Mook as recently
re-proven that such a massively inert form of rocket inert mass as per
our good old Saturn5 can manage to get such terrific payload tonnage at
better than (meaning lower than) a mere 32:1 (rocket/payload) as
situated within LL-1 in as little as 4.5 days with tonnage and fuel to
spare. Of course, I can't identify any other such fly-by-rocket
capability that's decades newer that comes even remotely close, and
that's regardless of using the very newest applications of such
rocket-science and of composites making the inert mass less than half
that of what the Saturn5 represented. Therefore obviously I'm at a
disadvantage of my not having "the right stuff" of your NASA certified
infomercial-science or those nifty conditional laws of physics that
obviously you have to work with.

No wonder I'm still so dumb and you're so gosh darn smart. Perhaps
that's been the problem with your SSTO/SSTP spaceplane that it's so
composite and thus so inert light weight and thus so capable that
regardless of the absolutely horrific aerodynamic volume doesn't even
need the sorts of SRBs or the far better LRBs of h2o2/c3h4o, is that
you're simply too damn smart for your own dumbfounded good.
-
Brad Guth

.

Quantcast