Armstrong lauds another spaceman

Fred J. McCall wrote:
Alain Fournier wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: "Paul F. Dietz" wrote:
:
: :Nonsense. Many many things have become affordable because
: f advances not specifically directed at those things.
:
: If you think it's nonsense, please tell us just what technologies you
: think are sufficiently 'dual use' to Mars flights and something else
: (and what that something else is) so as to drive down the costs of
: Mars flights.
:
:
:New stronger materials (a dual use, airplanes and others), electronics
dual use home computers and others),

This doesn't NECESSARILY drive down costs. I seem to recall that a
decade and more ago some folks arrived at the conclusion that using
swaged steel for the body of an expendable launcher was more
economical than using more exotic materials that would be stronger and
lighter.

Sure. But even that gets cheaper with time -- high strength steel
is increasingly used in mundane applications like tell buildings
and automobiles, so even it will get cheaper with time. For that
matter, steel production itself will become more efficient with
time, as mills are increasingly optimized and automated.

I repeat: your position would require that the technologies for
Mars vehicles be completely disjoint from those used in the rest
of the technosphere.

Paul