Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.space.tech    |    Technical and general issues related to    |    3,113 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 1,343 of 3,113    |
|    Ruediger Klaehn to Cris Fitch    |
|    Re: High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heav    |
|    26 Jan 04 16:40:53    |
      XPost: sci.space.policy       From: klaehn@gamemakers.de              Cris Fitch wrote:              > Not long ago it looked like the Medium lift market was       > over-subscribed with Proton, Ariane-5, Sea Launch, Atlas-5       > and Delta-IV. Now with the retirement of Shuttle and a       > new plan for manned exploration coming into being, we've       > got to ask ourselves:       >       > 1) Launch lots of medium payloads       > or       > 2) Go Heavy       >       Option 2 would be a dream come true for whoever gets to build the heavy lift       vehicle. The barrier of entry for such a beast is very large, so you do not       have to fear competition that much. If you had a standard payload size of,       say, 5 metric tons, you would have many competitors from the start, and       even completely new launch methods such as space tethers, space elevators,       TSTO or SSTO space transports could enter the market at comparatively low       cost.              Given that, it would be a mistake to let the provider of the launch vehicle       design the payloads. That way boeing might have just enough "unexpected"       weight growth that their own vehicle is the only possible launch option...              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca