mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (02/07/86)
In article <3265@hplabsb.UUCP> bl@hplabsb.UUCP writes: >BTW, do we really want to replace the shuttle? Would it be wiser to place >the money toward the development of the next generation space vehicle? >As was posted by someone else earlier, the shuttle is a hightmarish >engineering kludge. NASA has already mentioned something called the >"space plane". This is a vehicle that takes off and lands as a conventional >airplane with jet engines but reaches a speed of mach 6 (presumably at >a very high altitude) before blasting into orbit with rocket motors. >It is 100% resuable, except for the fuel of course :-). That's way down the road. In the short run, even if Martin Marietta goes wild making Titan IIIs, there's still enough that they can't do to justify another shuttle, in my opinion. So let's go build _Endeavour_, before the price goes up. C. Wingate