A kerosene-fueled X-33 as a single stage to orbit vehicle.
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Everything has its own Aether
Next: Fine Particle Physics and the Mathison-Trenite Life Energy Fluctuation Meter (LEF Meter) PART FOUR - {FPP 20090913-draft-V1.0-p4}
From: Sam Wormley on 1 Nov 2009 21:13 Fred J. McCall wrote: > Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > > :Sylvia Else wrote: > :> > :> Depends which market you're in. Space tourism, for example, needs low > :> cost per kg, but not particularly large payloads. > :> > : > : I would think that space tourism, would require some margin--some extra > : safety. > : > > Why? You need what you need. Why would tourists require 'extra'? > > You lose a human in a rocket, people will want their money back.
From: Sylvia Else on 1 Nov 2009 21:14 Sam Wormley quoted: > "Although a SSTO rocket might theoretically be built, margins would be > likely to be very thin- even comparatively minor problems may tend to > mean that a project to achieve this could fail to achieve the necessary > mass-fraction to reach orbit with useful payload". > I wonder how far aviation would have got if the first aircraft had been required to be economically viable. Sylvia.
From: Sylvia Else on 1 Nov 2009 21:19 Sam Wormley wrote: > Fred J. McCall wrote: >> Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)mchsi.com> wrote: >> >> :Sylvia Else wrote: >> :> :> Depends which market you're in. Space tourism, for example, >> needs low :> cost per kg, but not particularly large payloads. >> :> : >> : I would think that space tourism, would require some margin--some >> extra >> : safety. >> : >> >> Why? You need what you need. Why would tourists require 'extra'? >> >> > > You lose a human in a rocket, people will want their money back. > Only if they haven't read the smallprint. Sylvia.
From: Sam Wormley on 1 Nov 2009 21:28 Fred J. McCall wrote: > Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > > :Fred J. McCall wrote: > :> Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > :> > :> :Sylvia Else wrote: > :> :> > :> :> Depends which market you're in. Space tourism, for example, needs low > :> :> cost per kg, but not particularly large payloads. > :> :> > :> : > :> : I would think that space tourism, would require some margin--some extra > :> : safety. > :> : > :> > :> Why? You need what you need. Why would tourists require 'extra'? > :> > : > : You lose a human in a rocket, people will want their money back. > : > > You lose a billion dollar satellite in a rocket and they're going to > want their money back, too. That's what insurance and liability > waivers are for. > Agreed--And they will probably use more reliable rockets too.
From: Sam Wormley on 1 Nov 2009 22:20
Fred J. McCall wrote: > Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > > :Fred J. McCall wrote: > :> Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > :> > :> :Fred J. McCall wrote: > :> :> Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > :> :> > :> :> :Sylvia Else wrote: > :> :> :> > :> :> :> Depends which market you're in. Space tourism, for example, needs low > :> :> :> cost per kg, but not particularly large payloads. > :> :> :> > :> :> : > :> :> : I would think that space tourism, would require some margin--some extra > :> :> : safety. > :> :> : > :> :> > :> :> Why? You need what you need. Why would tourists require 'extra'? > :> :> > :> : > :> : You lose a human in a rocket, people will want their money back. > :> : > :> > :> You lose a billion dollar satellite in a rocket and they're going to > :> want their money back, too. That's what insurance and liability > :> waivers are for. > :> > : > : Agreed--And they will probably use more reliable rockets too. > : > > So we're to "all rockets will be reliable". So why do you think > "space tourism, would require some margin--some extra safety", again? > Let me clarify. 1. SSTO launch vehicles have never been used to put things in orbit. 2. SSTOs are hard to design. 3. I'm guessing the are not the best candidate for space tourism. |