View Single Post
  #18  
Old September 23rd 10, 07:13 AM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default Time to Think ?Horizontal? for Future Space Launches

On Sep 22, 5:22*pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 22, 1:16 pm, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article 615e349f-7cd7-47a8-bf77-86457df7ef22
@i4g2000prf.googlegroups.com, says...


Reusable boosters are smaller lighter and less costly - according to
Lockheed.


http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,220472,00.html


VTOVL is the way to go.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/30943696/ETDHLRLV


to launch significant payloads cheaply.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/35439593/S...-Satellite-GEO


Do you really have to thread-jack at every opportunity to push your
napkin drawings? No rational person here is taking you seriously.


Jeff
--
The only decision you'll have to make is
Who goes in after the snake in the morning?


Why do you care Jeff?


Because it's damn annoying and rude.

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.


I agree, Jeff Pat and Fred are damn annoying and rude. My comment was
relevant to the horizontal take off and landing statement. I don't
see how that can be annoying and rude.