stockman - 18/1/2008 11:00 AMThis more than anything in my mind shows how risk adverse society in general has become. There is no stomach for losses and no stomach for taking bold steps anymore. We are never getting off this rock in my lifetime.... :frown:
edkyle99 - 19/1/2008 6:45 PMQuoteyinzer - 18/1/2008 5:25 PMThe ESAS report definitely claimed that Ares I was cheaper than an EELV solution.Right, but that "Ares I" (called CLV at the time) was substantially unlike the current Ares I. It used a four segment booster and an SSME powered upper stage - items that largely existed. It weighed 200 tonnes less than the current Ares I at liftoff. I don't think that anyone is brave enough to claim that an Ares I with a five-segment booster first stage and a J-2X powered upper stage is cheaper than an EELV. - Ed Kyle
yinzer - 18/1/2008 5:25 PMThe ESAS report definitely claimed that Ares I was cheaper than an EELV solution.
Sid454 - 20/1/2008 1:37 PM BTW the RL60 is at an advanced stage of completion.
Sid454 - 20/1/2008 1:37 PMThen explain the four RL10s on the LSAM and multi engine centaurs.
Sid454 - 20/1/2008 12:37 PMI think the centaur guys at Lm are a lot smarter then you are and BTW the RL60 is at an advanced stage of completion.BTW here's a page on the engine http://www.pratt-whitney.com/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=34c309d09e91c010VgnVCM1000000881000aRCRDand some news on it .http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=11883 :cool: