"Allen Thomson" wrote in message
...

So why not continue to use the RD-180 or, if needed, license the
RD-170?

"Other key target characteristics for this new capability include
improvements in overall engine robustness and efficiency, health
monitoring, affordability, and operability."

Improvements over what? The RD-180?

Unfortunately the US has no large (currently produced) LOX/kerosene engine
which is better than the RD-180. Besides the obvious reason that we don't
want to keep relying on the Russians for our launch vehicle engines, you may
want to note how old the RD-180 design is. Certainly the US could do
better, given some R&D dollars. Getting NASA back to R&D is a good thing.

As for the Russian angle, look how they appear to be charging NASA much
higher costs for Soyuz flights than they do for tourists. This is not a
good thing for the US.

Jeff
--
"Take heart amid the deepening gloom
that your dog is finally getting enough cheese" - Deteriorata - National
Lampoon