Launch Costs

The space shuttle is too fragile. It is difficult to believe that a key part
of the design (the fact that tiles would be stuck on), was not properly
qualified, before going ahead with the programme.

Look at Vostok, the rocket is held steady even in 40Kmph winds by support
structures and they can fire in practically any weather condition. If you
wish to mass produce, margin must be built into the design. Also perhaps,
after aerospace designers have conceptualised the system, the final design
should be done by industrial designers.

Selvaraj

From: "Robert"

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Combs, Mike"
>

> > he claims that it would be easy to adapt things off the shelf
> > without even bother to test to see if they can handle multi g
> > acceleration in different directions.
>
> I don't think he's advocating not ever testing anything (though it's
> been a while since I read this paper thoroughly). I think his is
rather
> arguing that if gearing up for frequent launching, we might well
launch
> 40 or 50 test flights before declaring the system operational. By
> contrast, the Shuttle had 2 launches designated as test flights.
It was
> then declared operational.
>
the thing is that every part of the shuttle was tested before it was
launched the first time. in order to do an assembly line construction
of rockets, you would have to forgo testing the parts of each
component. also those shuttles got two full flight test before they
were operation. one shot rockets dont get one flight test.

if a car engine fails, it stops and you call a tow truck. if a rocket
engine fails during launch, you could end up taking out a city. to me
thats a big differnce.