View Single Post
  #57  
Old March 8th 07, 10:29 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.station,sci.space.shuttle
Herb Schaltegger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default The 100/10/1 Rule.

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 15:02:44 -0600, kT wrote
(in article ):

Herb Schaltegger wrote:
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 11:19:55 -0600, kT wrote
(in article ):

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

Bwahahahahahahahahaa!
Get your head out of your ass and realize that money makes the world go
round.
And apparently you've got it to burn. Don't worry, you can print more.


How does a notional tiny-payload expendable SSTO make any kind of economic
sense?


I thought I just explained to you that useful payload is increased by an
order of magnitude, by designing the booster stage itself to be payload?


You explained nothing. A booster itself is not a useful payload in any
meaningful sense.

Plus, I've designed a nosecone engine carrier that can return a 100
million dollar engine to a soft landing anywhere on Earth, so you get
the engine back too.


Sure you have. Detailed design drawings, please. Including materials and
processing specs, interface controls, and cost estimates (don't forget
development, qualification and acceptance test plans and funding schedules
while you're at it).

All hail the next internet non-engineer genius who has somehow managed to
outsmart and out-think everyone who came before him. :-/


--
You can run on for a long time,
Sooner or later, God'll cut you down.
~Johnny Cash