🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.space
Article #7147

Re: DC-1 eventual construction question...

#7147
From: Edward V. Wright
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:03
68 lines
3215 bytes
In <1993Jan27.020909.11819@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>For the forssable future, I think it is.

Fortunately, your opinions are not acts of God. :-)


>>Lockheed was ready to proceed with an 
>>SSTO using its own money, if the government was willing to get out
>>of the way.  

>What do you mean by out of the way?

I'm only repeating what I heard, but I think it's fairly obvious
they were talking about regulation (and maybe a guarantee that
the government would not build something to compete with them).


>>Grumman was prepared to go ahead with the development
>>of a smaller, commercial SSTO (Frequent Flyer) using its own funds, 
>>if SDIO had selected its proposal for the suborbital demonstration 

>That is news to me. Grumman was not one of the Phase I contractors.

Grumman's bid was declared ineligible because it was not technically
single-stage-to-orbit.  (It's air-launched from a 747.)


>>Boeing is prepared to go ahead with an SSTO project, if it
>>can be shown what the markets are.  

>Sure. The operative words are 'if it can be shown what the markets are'.
>They won't settle for expected space tourism or other applications which
>may or may not happen.

Please tell me what else was said at the meeting, Allen.  I don't
recall hearing that.


>>That's because you're looking at the wrong market.  

>I am looking at the existing launch market. There are no others.

Oh?  Really?  I could have sworn I saw an ad in this morning's
paper for flights to Australia.  And that Society Expeditions
collected quite a few reservations for LEO tourist flights, 
just a few years back.  Guess the memory does play tricks
at my age.


>>There is a market for fast transportation, for people 
>>as well as cargo.  

>I agree. The problem is that this cannot be proven to the degree needed
>to justify the opportunity cost of funding development. 

I can't prove Santa Claus exists.  As for Federal Express... give
me your address and I'll have the evidence on your desk at 10:00
tomorrow morning.


>If you don't agree, show us your business plan.

Sorry, it's not my plan.  If you want to see it, you'll
have to talk to the copyright holder.

(Yes, I know, I'm a terrible fussbudget about these things.
Comes from being a professional writer.)
Technical Details
Message-ID: <ewright.728111025@convex.convex.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!news.oc.com!convex!ewright
References: <1993Jan21.141726.1@max.u.washington.edu> <1993Jan26.024338.10181@iti.org> <ewright.728027076@convex.convex.com> <1993Jan27.020909.11819@iti.org>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.space
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!news.oc.com!convex!ewright
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: DC-1 eventual construction question...
Sender: usenet@news.eng.convex.com (news access account)
Message-ID: <ewright.728111025@convex.convex.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:03:45 GMT
References: <1993Jan21.141726.1@max.u.washington.edu> <1993Jan26.024338.10181@iti.org> <ewright.728027076@convex.convex.com> <1993Jan27.020909.11819@iti.org>
Nntp-Posting-Host: bach.convex.com
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.
Lines: 69