XPost: sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.space.policy   
   From: alain245@videotron.ca   
      
   On Jun/12/2018 at 5:36 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote :   
   > Doc O'Leary   wrote on Tue, 12 Jun   
   > 2018 15:00:13 -0000 (UTC):   
   >   
   >> For your reference, records indicate that   
   >> Fred J. McCall  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Doc O'Leary   wrote on Mon, 11 Jun   
   >>> 2018 22:35:20 -0000 (UTC):   
   >>>   
   >>>> Chicken and egg.  The fact is that we *do* sometimes have to   
   >>>> elaborately engineer spacecraft in order to make them small enough to   
   >>>> fit into a nose cone or payload bay of a rocket.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Head and ass.  Cite for such payloads?  Be specific.  You're posting   
   >>> into a 'sci' newsgroup.  Handwavium is not sufficient.   
   >>   
   >> Then I must say I note a lack of citations for your own claims.   
   >>   
   >   
   > I haven't made any claims.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> Mine   
   >> are easy enough to demonstrate.  I can literally link to just about   
   >> *any* payload that unfolds to deploy as evidence.  Let’s start with   
   >> the obvious:   
   >>   
   >>    
   >>   
   >   
   > Not a good example.  Things like solar arrays are launched folded   
   > because they can't take acceleration without snapping off, not because   
   > they're 'too bulky'.  Try again?   
      
   The telescope is folded, not only the solar arrays.   
      
      
   Alain Fournier   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)