again... I was RIGHT about the Ares-5 (but NASA has not made theright choice)

..

again... I was RIGHT about the Ares-5 (but NASA has not made the right
choice)

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5451

TWO YEARS AGO (I repeat, TWO YEARS AGO!!!) I've said that the Ares-5
is underpowered:

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/011srb5.html

and (again, TWO YEARS AGO!!!) I've ALREADY suggested the better,
faster and cheaper solution:

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/006_superSLV.html

NASA Ares-5: 5.5 + 5.5 = 11 segments

"MY" Ares-5: 4 + 4 + 4 = 12 segments

MY design offers MORE power at LESS costs and in LESS time!

WHY did they have lost TWO years around a wrong design if the they can
(simply) get the BEST design on my website???

..

On Jun 16, 4:32 pm, gaetanomarano wrote:
.

again... I was RIGHT about the Ares-5 (but NASA has not made the right
choice)

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5451

TWO YEARS AGO (I repeat, TWO YEARS AGO!!!) I've said that the Ares-5
is underpowered:

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/011srb5.html

and (again, TWO YEARS AGO!!!) I've ALREADY suggested the better,
faster and cheaper solution:

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/006_superSLV.html

NASA Ares-5: 5.5 + 5.5 = 11 segments

"MY" Ares-5: 4 + 4 + 4 = 12 segments

MY design offers MORE power at LESS costs and in LESS time!


wronga and wrong. It will take longer and cost more because of pad
mods

The same bad idea was posted on NASAspaceflight.com too. Are you
posting under an alias on that thread too?

3 SRB's are not doable. the pad and MLP can't handle them. Also the
ET attachment is not doable.

On 17 Giu, 00:53, wrote:
wronga and wrong. *It will take longer and cost more because of pad
mods
The same bad idea was posted on NASAspaceflight.com too. *Are you
posting under an alias on that thread too?
3 SRB's are not doable. *the pad and MLP can't handle them. *Also the
ET attachment is not doable.

first of all, I did NOT post on nasaspaceflight.lobby (not under my
real name nor under any kind of nickname) and I will NEVER post again
(after my brief "few days experience" in january 2006) on
nasaspaceflight.direct in future

I'm NOT used to give a "second chance" to peoples that do things like
the nasaspaceflight.firednasaengineers do

second, you have not posted any link to the "same bad idea was posted
on NASAspaceflight.frustratedguys" about the 3 SRB4 Ares-5

third, the launch pad changes to handle three SRBs could minimal, in
the order of a $100 million, or so

last, the "ET attachment" problem (simply) doesn't exists, since
(both) NASA and MY Ares-5 concepts will NOT use the strandard
Shuttle's ET but a BRAND NEW (and larger) core stage that could be
designed the way the want/need

.