home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31 / NN_1992_31.iso / spool / sci / space / 18614 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1993-01-03  |  1.2 KB  |  26 lines
  1. Newsgroups: sci.space
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!torn!utzoo!henry
  3. From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
  4. Subject: Re: SSTO vs 2 stage
  5. Message-ID: <C0Av86.90t@zoo.toronto.edu>
  6. Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 22:45:41 GMT
  7. References: <1992Dec31.015157.14864@cs.rochester.edu> <ewright.725820847@convex.convex.com> <93002.220235SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <1993Jan3.104049.2581@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
  8. Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
  9. Lines: 15
  10.  
  11. In article <1993Jan3.104049.2581@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
  12. >The idea of a 2 stage DC configuration seems technically sound, but how
  13. >would it be compatible with the launch facilities designed around the
  14. >intended DC-vehicle (single stage)?
  15.  
  16. It wouldn't be, basically.  It would be a special configuration for
  17. special needs, and would require special launch facilities.
  18.  
  19. >Could the service gantries and launch pads be designed to accomodate
  20. >different spacecraft configurations?
  21.  
  22. It can be done, but it runs up the price, so it isn't done unnecessarily.
  23. -- 
  24. "God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
  25.        -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
  26.