Gentlefolk <<...less mass == [presumably] less chance of casualties per launch, even if that means you launch more often to launch the same total mass>>
My thought is that this is scenario dependent, both on the technology and the insurance pool arrangements. As a military guy, I'm aware that, with a given mass of bombs, one can damage more area with a number of small bombs than with a single big one, because the radius of destruction goes as the cube root of the mass/energy available but only as the square root of the area to be destroyed. However, a small enough vehicle may not crash with enough force to reach certain thresholds of damage applicable to big vehicles (busting underground gas lines, for instance). Also, if one considers that, for an individual insurer, the first calamity of any size would end the insurance exposure, the smaller the better. So an individual insurer might prefer the smaller vehicles, whereas bigger ones might result in less payout for the industry as a whole. The preference then depends on arrangements to share the risk across the pool of insurers. --Best, Gerald _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
