From: Michael Lorrey (retroman@together.net)
Date: Wed Aug 05 1998 - 11:13:07 MDT
CALYK@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 98-08-04 19:21:46 EDT, you write:
>
> << I also hate to be techno-pesimistic, but this is *rockets* you are talking
> about. So, I'd like to point out that Gary Hudson has been involved in
> many, many rocket projects, all failures. I applaud his determination. In
> my opinion, he is a brilliant salesman, and can attract funding to any
> rocket project at all. Since his job in this curent endevour is not a
> technical one, I am sure he is an asset to the project. In my opinion, all
> of his technical ideas of the past were doomed due to a lack of respect for
> simplicity, and I am not speaking out of hindsight. For that matter, most
> space launch projects suffer the same problem.
>
> -PW >>
>
> What happens when the Rotons dont work? its doomed. If a shuttle loses its
> landing gear it can still land, but then again when has a shuttle lost its
> landing gear?
Since the roton is essentially a helicopter with rockets, it can complete
autogyro maneuvers and can land in any patch of field in an emergency, while a
shuttle requires a specially built 10,000 foot runway with twice the normal
concrete thickness. A shuttle lands at over 250 miles per hour, so if it loses a
landing gear, they are basically screwed unless they ditch at sea.Mike Lorrey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:25 MST