On Mar 9, 4:01*pm, Damon Hill wrote:
giveitawhirl2008 wrote in news:cdd5d1d1-6395-
:

I guess it's really a dumb question, considering the history of
energia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energia

But the thought has croseed my mind: if a deep-pockets entity built a
lifter that could put up 200,000 lbs, or greater, might not someone
decide, 'hey, we could build a space station to lauch on that thing,'
or 'hey, we could use that to send up and assemble moonships or
Marsships [or such]?"

With the heavy lifter already developed and available at some
particular price per lauch, then someone ELSE could concentate on
applications: space stations for tourists, interplanetary craft, etc.

There would be extremely few, if any, payloads. *The proposed missions
would cost *much* more than the launch cost; if it takes deep pockets
just to develop and build the rocket, imagine what it'll take for a
manned Mars mission.

Maybe, just maybe, solar power; that stands a chance of actually
generating money to pay for the investment.

This is a case of, if it was built they might come if you
gave them a good reason for it.

--Damon

Well, it's true: money is a big deal no matter what. Sally Ride said
that if the Orion program system where already built and ready to go,
the first thing NASA would have to do is shut it down because even
NASA's proposed budget at the time would not afford NASA to operate
it.

Yet, it seems the heavy lift capability - or lack thereof - is always
one big factor in planning big space enterprises. If all you needed
was cash and you could launch *now*, it seems that would be a major
hurdle out of the way.