Article View: sci.space
Article #8745Re: Sanger
From: Mark Robert Thorson
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1989 05:35
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1989 05:35
15 lines
964 bytes
964 bytes
>This seems like a better idea than HOTOL or NASP: no need to take the >entire vehicle to orbit or to make the first stage capable of flight >at extreme hypersonic speeds. > > Paul F. Dietz > dietz@cs.rochester.edu If I'm not mistaken, the original concept for the space shuttle called for a manned, reusable plane to carry the shuttle to an altitude from which it could make orbit by itself. The solid-rocket boosters were a cost-saving plan when the budget got cut. Wouldn't a re-activiation of this design objective be one of the least costly and most safe ways of turning our technological duckling into a technological swan?
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<15877@cup.portal.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!mmmReferences:
<1989Mar14.172237.29235@cs.rochester.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!mmm From: mmm@cup.portal.com (Mark Robert Thorson) Newsgroups: sci.space Subject: Re: Sanger Message-ID: <15877@cup.portal.com> Date: 16 Mar 89 05:35:17 GMT References: <1989Mar14.172237.29235@cs.rochester.edu> Organization: The Portal System (TM) Lines: 15