XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics, sci.astro   
   From: fjmccall@gmail.com   
      
   "Robert Clark"  wrote:   
      
   >"Fred J. McCall"  wrote in message   
   >news:m3k9vc9einooof0s910qkkafc8u57vkgc6@4ax.com...   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>Oversized launchers don't get used very much. Satellites providers don't   
   >>>like sharing launch vehicles with other satellite providers. They want a   
   >>>dedicated launch vehicle.   
   >>>A reusable launcher with a ca. 10 ton payload to LEO would get more work   
   >>>for   
   >>>satellite launches than a 150 or 50 ton launcher.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>My bullshit detector just went off.  Satellite providers don't care if   
   >>they're sharing or not.  They care about the cost to them and the odds   
   >>of a failed launch for their stuff.  If a 150 ton launcher is cheaper   
   >>than a 10 ton launcher and the success rate for each individual   
   >>payload is roughly equivalent, they'll go on the 150 ton launcher.   
   >>   
   >   
   >It's based on the experience with the Ariane 5. '   
   >   
      
   It has not been the experience with SpaceX.   
      
      
   --   
   "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar   
    territory."   
                                         --G. Behn   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)