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: Stupid Shut Cost arguements (was Re: Terminal Velocity
- Message-ID: <1993Jan6.025846.15440@iti.org>
- Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
- References: <1993Jan4.154842.13841@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1993Jan4.180947.20495@iti.org> <72958@cup.portal.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 02:58:46 GMT
- Lines: 35
-
- In article <72958@cup.portal.com> BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn) writes:
-
- > Excellent news about Soyuz ACRV, but even considering Shuttle
- > launch costs, it seems cheaper to launch by Shuttle or Russian
- > booster instead of Titan or Atlas.
-
- For station logistics, we should use Atlas(Titan)/Soyuz for crew transfer
- and Zenith Star HLV's for material. This will save us $2 to $3 billion
- per year (we can start on the Lunar base with the savings) PLUS produce
- significant reductions in overall US launch costs.
-
- > Neither is man-rated, and
-
- There is no need to man rate. It adds cost but doesn't affect
- safety. If it where your money would buy the $70 million 98% safe
- Atlas or the $90 million 98% safe Atlas?
-
- > If it is your contention to replace Shuttle with Atlas-Soyuz, that's
- > another matter. I think it would cost too much to reconstruct Atlas
- > manned launch facilities for just two or three launches per year,
- > and I think manned Titan III/IV is now a pipedream.
-
- As I said, there is no point in man rating. Facilities costs can be paid
- with the interest on the savings. In addition, I assume we would be looking
- at 10 to 20 launches per year.
-
- If you want to refute, let's see some concrete numbers.
-
- Allen
-
- --
- +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
- | Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves |
- | aws@iti.org | nothing undone" |
- +----------------------109 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
-