|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
While the U.S. plans to phase out the shuttle and abandon RLV
development in favor of a return to Apollo-style capsules, it's nice to see that the Europeans are still pursuing reusable shuttle concepts! http://space.com/missionlaunches/pho...ay_040507.html |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
vthokie wrote:
While the U.S. plans to phase out the shuttle and abandon RLV development in favor of a return to Apollo-style capsules, it's nice to see that the Europeans are still pursuing reusable shuttle concepts! What do you have against the europeans? Paul |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
"Paul F. Dietz" wrote in message ...
What do you have against the europeans? Huh? Nothing at all. I'm glad to see that someone is proceeding in the right direction! I just think it's sad that the U.S. has failed to develop a next generation RLV system, and is now planning to return to capsules launched on expendable rockets. That hardly seems like much of a vision for the future. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
vthokie wrote:
[...] I just think it's sad that the U.S. has failed to develop a next generation RLV system, and is now planning to return to capsules launched on expendable rockets. That hardly seems like much of a vision for the future. The vision for the future should be: Do the cheapest useful thing you can right now. Do cheaper things over time, evolving as technical capabilities and volume of missions / payload / whatever grows over time. In assuming that you have to jump forwards a bunch before you can do anything, you miss a bunch of low hanging cost reduction fruit. With Shuttle, we did that and ended up not saving any money at all over continuing to fly Saturns, in rough terms, with a lot of fatalities and long standdowns and the many year gap from the last Apollo to Skylab and the first Shuttle flights. The conquest of space is not an excuse for splurging on inappropriate technical development. Inappropriate technical development is a drag on successful exploration and development, not a bonus to it. Cost and capabilities and requirements are the figures of merit. Any "step back" that continues to have the capabilities to meet mission requirements, but is cheaper, is better not worse. -george william herbert |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message .. . On 9 May 2004 09:45:23 -0700, in a place far, far away, (vthokie) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: "Paul F. Dietz" wrote in message ... What do you have against the europeans? Huh? Nothing at all. I'm glad to see that someone is proceeding in the right direction! They are not. Agreed. I just think it's sad that the U.S. has failed to develop a next generation RLV system, and is now planning to return to capsules launched on expendable rockets. That hardly seems like much of a vision for the future. The US hasn't failed. Only the US government. The US (thankfully, for now, despite the blindness of many) consists of much more than its government. The emerging private sector has a great vision for the future, and one that will quickly sidetrack the pointless European activities. Disagree. I don't think there's any basis for this kind of statement what so ever. Dave |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
On Sun, 09 May 2004 19:45:03 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Dave
O'Neill" dave @ NOSPAM atomicrazor . com made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: The US hasn't failed. Only the US government. The US (thankfully, for now, despite the blindness of many) consists of much more than its government. The emerging private sector has a great vision for the future, and one that will quickly sidetrack the pointless European activities. Disagree. With what part do you disagree? That there's more to the US than the government, or that the private sector has a great vision for the future, or that it will quickly sidetrack the European activies, or that the European activities are pointless? I don't think there's any basis for this kind of statement what so ever. shrug |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 09 May 2004 19:45:03 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Dave O'Neill" dave @ NOSPAM atomicrazor . com made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: The US hasn't failed. Only the US government. The US (thankfully, for now, despite the blindness of many) consists of much more than its government. The emerging private sector has a great vision for the future, and one that will quickly sidetrack the pointless European activities. Disagree. With what part do you disagree? That there's more to the US than the government, or that the private sector has a great vision for the future, That part. or that it will quickly sidetrack the European activies, And that part. or that the European activities are pointless? No, there I agree. Reinventing a wheel which didn't work properly in the first place is pointless. I don't think there's any basis for this kind of statement what so ever. shrug |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Europe moves forward while U.S. moves backward?
On Sun, 09 May 2004 20:04:59 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Dave
O'Neill" dave @ NOSPAM atomicrazor . com made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: With what part do you disagree? That there's more to the US than the government, or that the private sector has a great vision for the future, That part. What's wrong with the vision of hundreds or thousands of launches per year, at prices many can afford? or that it will quickly sidetrack the European activies, And that part. We'll see. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|