On Sep 23, 2:14*am, William Mook wrote:
On Sep 23, 4:46*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:









Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the newsgroup the
attendants let Mookie back on the net.

William Mook wrote:

Who do NASA think they're fooling?

Who do you think you're fooling?

The X-37 is unpiloted and carries only 5 tonnes. *The SLS (proposed)
carries no more than 70 tonnes, 90 tonnes LESS than Saturn V. *(who
cares if its 35 ft taller?) The Delta IV heavy 25.8 tones, LESS than
the Space Shuttle.

And all of them are either flying hardware or well into design,
unlike...

A true improvement in capability would be a FULLY REUSABLE (all stages
pieces and parts) launcher built around the Space Shuttle EXTERNAL
TANK collection equipped with cross-feeding modified for re-use and
recovery using a reusable aerospike engine built around a collection
of five RS-68 pumps - at each unit.

Napkin scribbling bull**** removed

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

As I imagine Saul Levy might say, NASA is bankrupt! *lol.

Actually, our DARPA and NASA have been bankrupt from the very get-go.

They never had to show a profit or even a breakeven. What other
definition of bankrupt is there?

Without your stuff there's simply no way our DARPA, NASA or any other
space orbital or off-world mission can represent anything except a
bankrupt kind of outcome that'll never return 10% on investment, much
less be allowed to show a profit.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”