On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 09:00:17 -0400, Jeff Findley
wrote:

It is not a tired argument. It is a damn good argument. Challenger's
crew died needlessly launching a comsat, which could have be done
better by an ELV. Much of station logistics is low cost items that
does not need a crew to deliver.

ISS crew and ISS cargo delivery missions are quite another. When the
crew and cargo are going to the very same place, putting them on the
same launch vehicle makes sense.

It should also be pointed out that today's airlines make a substantial
part of their revenue by carrying cargo in the hold of passenger
airliners. This is why, for example, the Airbus A330 is much more
popular than the similarly-sized Boeing 767... it has a lot more cargo
space. (And it's why airlines starting charging passengers $25 per
bag.)

I really don't understand the prevalant attitude that because the
Shuttle was a failure, then all systems which combine crew and cargo
will be, too. That's a bunch of hooey, and another item for the
"wrong lessons learned from the Shuttle" file (which already has the
old standby "reusable spacecraft aren't feasible" and "wings on
spacecraft are bad" entries.)

Brian