From: fairwater@gmail.com   
      
   kenw@kmsi.net wrote:   
      
   >fairwater@gmail.com (Derek Lyons) wrote:   
   >   
   >>The real question is...  Why add a *second* propulsion system in the   
   >>first place?  If you need a rocket to get from to the scramjet range,   
   >>and then a rocket to get from scramjet range to orbital range...  What   
   >>is the scramjet adding?   
   >>   
   >>D.   
   >   
   >What if you don't want to get to orbit?  Let's drop the bias, ok?  If a   
   >scramjet isn't useful for putting something in orbit, that doesn't mean it   
   >ain't useful at all.   
      
   No, I'm not going to drop the bias.  Note that the name of this group   
   is sci.SPACE.tech, and thus that is context of our discussions here.   
      
   >There are clearly potential uses for scramjets that do not involve   
   >spaceflight at all, and others that involve it only indirectly -- say, as a   
   >reuseable air-launch carrier.  Those need to be considered.   
      
   A reuseable air-launcher is *directly* involved in spaceflight...   
   Period.  Thus my objection stands.  Any other usage is irrelevant to   
   the purposes of this forum.   
      
   >As best I can determine, there is no better forum that this one for such   
   >discussion.  Let's drop the blinders and consider other possibilities.  To   
   >quote Henry's sig, "the box isn't our friend".   
      
   Until you've earned your chops around here, your attitude won't win   
   friends or influence people.  At any rate, your primary question has   
   already been adressed, and as is the way of Usenet, the thread is   
   drifting a wee bit.   
      
   D.   
   --   
   Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.   
      
   -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.   
   Oct 5th, 2004 JDL   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)