Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 02:58:43 GMT
"John Doe" <jdoe@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:4440078D.422A272C@xxxxxxxxxx
mmaker@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
If NASA are spending over $10,000,000,000 to build CSM 2.0, how much
exactly do you think they'd need to build Shuttle 2.0? I'd guess well
on the far side of $100,000,000,000.
Use Google. Many here have said that building a new orbiter with the
same shape would be about 2 billion dollars. So double it for cost
overruns, and add 2 billion for improvements NASA already had planned
for shuttles but wasn't allowed to implement and you're still well below
the cost of the CEV.
Use google, but keep in mind those prices were years ago (basically about
the time Endeavour was built in the late 80s) and assumed the production
line tooling existed. This is no longer true.
And it assumed a 1980s version of an updated shuttle.
I'm guessing at this point we're easily taknig double the figures you
mention, at least.
And to be realistic, the Shuttles should have been built continually
with the older ones cannabalised. Build one every 4-5 years.
Probably.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: Brian Thorn
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- References:
- Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: Mike Dennis
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: John Doe
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: mmaker
- Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- From: John Doe
- Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Prev by Date: Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Next by Date: Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Previous by thread: Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Next by thread: Re: Apollo 2.0 Concept Unworkable?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
