[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: starship-design: DC-X etc.

Hi Group

"L. Parker" wrote:

> One of the reasons why the DC-X was so attractive was that it stood the best
> chance of reaching extremely low payload to orbit prices. As I am sure you
> appreciate, much of the cost of any orbital launch is in the ground based
> infrastructure required to make it happen. DC-X did not require any of that
> infrastructure. In fact, it could have been used as a lander on your
> Explorer with no modifications. It was quite capable of orbit to surface and
> return operations, something the shuttle derivatives will never do.
> Lee

Another attractive aspect of DC-X and derivatives was the vertical landing
capability, which gave it the potential for lunar operations with very little
need for further development. Just tank up in orbit and kick into a lunar
landing trajectory. Refuelling for such a mission could be achieved via an
Energia-class launcher, or once LOX was available from the Moon, even smaller


> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth? Judging from realistic
> simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we
> can assume it will be pretty bad.

Tsk, tsk. That'll get the Animal Liberationists on your back. The fooilsh aspect
of all "ecotopias" is the fact that Earth is not protected from threats from
space. One day a sledgehammer blow will come. Without nukes and space-travel
we're screwed. Isn't it weird how neutron bombs might be the only protection
against rubble-pile asteroids like Mathilde?