Leon Brooks wrote:
~lol~On Sunday 02 February 2003 12:48 am, J. Greenlees wrote:Leon Brooks wrote:That'll knacker NASA for a while too, but maybe they'll try more imaginative launch vehicles now.maybe they'll get rid of legacy tech and go state of the art in design? naw, NASA turned that down when starting the shuttle program, couldn't wait for a design that would be able to use any international airport. they won't change the attitude now, not after investing 30 years into the things
Perhaps Europe/Japan/Russia will take note, although the latter needs money badly to survive. Australia hasn't the financial resources to do anything significant, one would think, but we could afford this if we wanted to:
http://www.highliftsystems.com/
Cheers; Leon
definately a better way to go, but most effective location is either peru or india. the distance to a geosync orbit being reduced by the altitude of the base.
the US government will never approve of a system that could not be based in continental us. not for the space program.
not unless it was an international programm, with several counties sharing costs equally. and even then the US would want thier own program under thier sole control.
the team still in the space station will have to use an old russian re-entry vehicle to get down next month, as nasa will probably be shutting all flights down for a year..again
