home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.space
- Path: sparky!uunet!convex!convex!ewright
- From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
- Subject: Re: SSTO vs 2 stage
- Sender: usenet@news.eng.convex.com (news access account)
- Message-ID: <ewright.725830188@convex.convex.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:29:48 GMT
- Distribution: sci
- References: <ewright.725755862@convex.convex.com> <1992Dec31.015157.14864@cs.rochester.edu> <ewright.725820847@convex.convex.com> <1992Dec31.182358.13827@cs.rochester.edu>
- Nntp-Posting-Host: bach.convex.com
- Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
- X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
- Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
- not necessarily those of CONVEX.
- Lines: 17
-
- In <1992Dec31.182358.13827@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes:
-
- >You are apparently tossing in the assumption that stacking will be
- >very expensive. This assumption may very well be true, but you have
- >not justified it.
-
- If you want justification, leave our office, drive out to the local
- airport (or truck stop), and look at the sort of routine maintenance
- that real transportation systems require. To turn an airliner around
- between flights, they unload the passengers, refuel, vacuum the interior,
- and run through the preflight checklist. Unless something unexpected
- crops up, that's all they do. Any additional maintenance, even something
- as a new coat of paint, would more than double the operating cost. More
- complex work, like stacking and mating stages, would probably increase it
- by a factor of 10.
-
-
-