home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.space
- Path: sparky!uunet!hela.iti.org!aws
- From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
- Subject: Re: DC cost estimates
- Message-ID: <1993Jan4.030642.11446@iti.org>
- Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
- References: <C06xEo.KFE.1@cs.cmu.edu>
- Distribution: sci
- Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 03:06:42 GMT
- Lines: 71
-
- In article <C06xEo.KFE.1@cs.cmu.edu> roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:
-
- >I hope you understand what I mean by the economic term "opportunity cost".
-
- Sure I know what opportunity cost is. But I always assumed that the
- higher opportunity cost was by using Shuttle. I admit I haven't worked
- out the details but I suspect that for a years Shuttle costs we could
- could find a way to use Mir for the locker experiments and redesign the
- few payloads which MUST fly on Shuttle. That would allow us to switch to
- far cheaper expendables if DC fails and still save money.
-
- >Similarly, with the Shuttle as an operational, manned system with a number
- >of currently unique abilities,
-
- The only 'unique capability' which has stood up is the ability to return
- large payloads. To date there is no demonstrated requirement for this
- ability.
-
- >the fact that it's in use indicates that
- >those who pay for it (NASA, the government in general, and the public in
- >general) get get some value out of it.
-
- But what is that value and is it worth the money spent? NASA's highest
- priority is to keep its centers funded. To government, Shuttle is a jobs
- program.
-
- >There are in fact a considerable
- >number of missions scheduled over the next few years. If the Shuttle program
- >were cancelled today, those missions would also have to be cancelled, or at
- >least deferred.
-
- Sure, but are those missions being conducted in the most cost effective
- way? To date, nobody has been able to show that they have been.
-
- However, this is all moot. Shuttle cannot be killed; it has too big a
- constituency. All we can do is hope it doesn't drag us all down with it.
-
- >I also have reservations about the "market" argument. Considering for
- >example the market for human-tended microgravity science experiments
- >(by "market" I include government and university programs), I don't see
- >how shutting off US services for several years would help that market to
- >grow.
-
- Who said anything about shutting off services? I didn't. I propose we use
- Mir and use the savings to fund even more work and perhaps build our own
- dedicated facility. We might be able to fund this without Shuttle, but we
- will be very hard pressed to do it WITH shuttle.
-
- >One question I'm not sure has been addressed before: is the DC-1 expected to
- >provide for a "shirtsleeve" environment access tube to the cargo bay, like
- >the Shuttle? In other words, would a "mini-Spacelab" be a viable option for
- >a DC-1 payload?
-
-
- A mini-spacelab would be viable. In fact, the DC design allows for delta-V,
- and duration tradeoffs which make it attractive. there may or may not be
- access however, between the flight crew and cargo bay (but there is no
- reason there couldn't be).
-
- >[Obviously, the Blancmanges of the planet Skyron are not going to get their
- >order filled any time soon.
-
- Damn good thing too. Otherwise we would have all been turned to Scotsmen
- long ago and the Blancmanges would have taken Wimbelton.
-
- Allen
- --
- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
- | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves |
- | aws@iti.org | nothing undone" |
- +----------------------111 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
-