Doug Jones wrote:
> Spike Jones wrote:
> > Ja, but what Im looking for here is to free Kistler et al from
> > having to make their products human-rated. Thats part of the
> > reason why the shuttle is so spendy: it needs three nines
> > reliability. Let NASA do what NASA does, lift primates
> > to orbit safely if expensively. Let the other launcher builders
> > trim the weight margins closer, and assume a higher level
> > of risk that we accept for our fellow humans. spike
> Two problems- historically, they've killed almost 1% of the humans
> they've tried to launch. That ain't "safely" in my book.
Ah, crap, Doug. Somewhere around a quarter of all people who trekked
into the American west were killed in violent confrontations or plain
stupidity rather quickly, I've heard. A 1% loss is tiddlywinks.
> Second, the
> big market, the real enabler for routine cheap access to space, is space
> tourism. Leaving manned space flight in NASA's hands is like building a
> luxury island hotel, then using an F-18 to deliver guests via ejection
Its worse than that. The outside temps run from 250 above to 250 below
and the hotel air conditioning is likely to go on the fritz at any given
moment, and you lose a hunk of your bone mass while up there, and they
give you a lousy exercise bike for keeping in shape.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:59:42 MDT