----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 9:30 PM Subject: Re: NASA Plans For Space Station Orbiter
> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 9:10 PM > Subject: NASA Plans For Space Station Orbiter > > > > > Although it includes few specifics, the plan stipulates the orbiter will > be > > safer, cheaper and require less preparation time than the shuttle. > > Does the plan stipulate a safer, cheaper orbiter that requires less > preparation than the plan for the space shuttle? > That appears to be what the sentence says. Or are you reading something into it that I am missing? (I admit to being confused by your reply. It appears to reiterate exactly the sentence you are responding to) Personally I don't believe it will ever be as cheap, safe, or fast to launch as they seem to hope it will be. I don't think this type of technology will *ever*! But I do believe it is necessary for the time being if we are to establish a presence in space. It seems to me and my lay mind that propulsion systems that rely on combustion and large masses are not efficient enough and are not safe enough for long term use. Maybe space elevators/beanstalks are the method of the future. Maybe it will be something else. Billions of invisible hands will write the future, of that I'm certain. xponent We Did It Maru rob ________________________________ You are a fluke of the universe. You have no right to be here. And whether you can hear it or not, the universe is laughing behind your back. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
