🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan8.134508.15155@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.220739.9367@cerberus.ulaval.ca> yergeau@phy.ulaval.ca (Francois Yergeau) writes:
>>The market, for one thing.  Spin off shuttle to the private sector, and
>>you're likely to get at most one provider, and one buyer (NASA).  
>
>Nonsense. Run KSC like an airport and Shuttle like an airliner. There is
>no reason that several companies couldn't buy Shuttles and lease the
>hanger facilities like any other airport.

This idea is based on the assumption that _large_ cost reductions could
be achieved by the private sector, which I'm not ready to buy.  The
shuttle is intrinsically expensive, with its maintenance-intensive
SSMEs, tiles, etc, and the standing army needed to operate it.  The
shuttle is no airliner, sorry.  This, IMHO, precludes important market
expansion, and you end up with a situation not unlike military
procurement, where $80 screwdrivers are not unheard of.  Talk about
cost reductions.

Note that I'm not denying that savings are possible, but I'm still not
convinced that they would materialize, were NASA to try.

Besides, who would need Delta Clipper if the shuttle could be made
cheap?

-- 
Francois Yergeau (yergeau@phy.ulaval.ca) |  De gustibus et coloribus
Centre d'Optique, Photonique et Laser    |  non disputandum
Departement de Physique                  |          -proverbe scolastique
Universite Laval, Ste-Foy, QC, Canada    |