Re: SPACE: Why so much EVA on ISS?

From: Adrian Tymes (
Date: Wed Mar 21 2001 - 20:04:04 MST

Spike Jones wrote:
> Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > Spike Jones wrote:
> > > Sure but we already have a man-rated launcher, the shuttle. If
> > > we had a good cheap satellite lifter, the two systems would
> > > complement each other nicely. With Roton and VentureStar
> > > dead, lets hope Kistler can make it fly. spike
> >
> > We already have satellite launching rockets, too. They're
> > ultra-expensive just like the shuttle (maybe different numbers, but
> > stil $too_much). That is the problem...
> 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

<shrugs> I've no problem with Kistler going for that approach. But I,
personally, feel that the potential for exploiting space is *much*
higher if we can get human-rated launchers cheap (which makes it much
easier to do cheap sat-rated ones too, even if you don't use the
human-rated launcher as a space truck).

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:59:42 MDT