A new record...

"Jeff Findley" wrote:
Given these figures, George's "back of the envelope" calculations appear to
be in the ballpark. I figured 190 tons, based on a linear scaling of
(non-afterburning) engine thrust and payload. For reference, a fueled Atlas
LV-3A Agena or a fueled Titan II each had a fueled weight of about 170 tons.
One has to wonder what size of payload one of these could put into LEO if
they were launched from 50k feet instead of sea level.

IIRC the BOTE calculations floated around here a while showed about a
10% payload increase. The key is that while they are higher, they
don't have that much additional energy, and energy, not altitude is
the key.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

John Ladasky wrote:
If 8-10 engines were all
that Scaled planned to buy, how did they snooker both EAC and SpaceDev
into competing for such a tiny contract?

"I'd like to buy 8-10 engines to the following specification,
with a 4-6 engine test series for each and then downselect to
one vendor for flight units. We are considering and asking
two vendors to bid. How much do you bid?"

Jim Benson knows how to make money. You can make money selling
one of something, or eight of something, or twenty, or a thousand.
It just changes how you price it relative to the per-unit cost
and the R&D and manufacturing fab setup costs.


-george william herbert