On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 10:26:58PM -0800, Randall Clague wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 15:50:37 -0500, Alex Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >- No communications network. You could only talk to satellite a couple of times
> >a week.
>
> There are no LEO orbits that don't pass above the
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 08:43:58 -0500 (EST), Henry Spencer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There is a persistent rumor that TGV, as in TGV Rockets, stands for
>> Three Guys in a Van... :-)
>
>Two Guys in a Van, actually. Pat has been heard to admit this in public,
>so it's not just a rumor. :-)
OK.
On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 12:37:43 -0800, Adrian Tymes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>We already
>have a bit more people than we need down there [at MTA]
Not many.
I have 12 positions identified for an MTA launch, though some of them
are dual hatted:
Pyro Operator
TRACON Liaison
Program Manager
Range Sa
On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 15:50:37 -0500, Alex Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>- No communications network. You could only talk to satellite a couple of times
>a week.
There are no LEO orbits that don't pass above the comm center's
horizon at least once a day.
>- Lastly a mental image of so
Donald Qualls wrote:
ISTM (from the standpoint of someone who's never actually worked on a
liquid fuel test or launch, just to be clear) that if you need three
people to work the actual launch, you need at least one more to drive
the fuel truck and connect and disconnect the hoses. And safety
februar 2003 14:44
To: ERPS
Subject: Re: [ERPS] musings
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Randall Clague wrote:
> >(Three guys, a truck, and a portable computer?)
>
> There is a persistent rumor that TGV, as in TGV Rockets, stands for
> Three Guys in a Van... :-)
Two Guys in a Van, actually
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Randall Clague wrote:
> >(Three guys, a truck, and a portable computer?)
>
> There is a persistent rumor that TGV, as in TGV Rockets, stands for
> Three Guys in a Van... :-)
Two Guys in a Van, actually. Pat has been heard to admit this in public,
so it's not just a rumor. :
On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 11:07:08 -0800, David Weinshenker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>(Three guys, a truck, and a portable computer?)
There is a persistent rumor that TGV, as in TGV Rockets, stands for
Three Guys in a Van... :-)
-R
--
Every complex, difficult problem has a simple,
easy solution -
Adrian Tymes wrote:
Donald Qualls wrote:
> ISTM (from the standpoint of someone who's never actually worked on a
> liquid fuel test or launch, just to be clear) that if you need three
> people to work the actual launch, you need at least one more to drive
> the fuel truck and connect and disco
Donald Qualls wrote:
> ISTM (from the standpoint of someone who's never actually worked on a
> liquid fuel test or launch, just to be clear) that if you need three
> people to work the actual launch, you need at least one more to drive
> the fuel truck and connect and disconnect the hoses. And saf
Henry Spencer wrote:
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Donald Qualls wrote:
With a launch system like the Castor, three guys, a truck and a computer
isn't at all out of line. With liquid fuel, I think you'd still need a
larger crew to fuel the vehicle.
How so? It doesn't take a bunch of people to fuel a
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Alex Fraser wrote:
> My first thoughts on reading
> - Sounds too much like a SCUD, we must be anti that here.
Not necessarily anti all aspects of it. And you need a lot more crew than
that for a Scud, by the way...
> - No communications network. You could only tal
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Donald Qualls wrote:
> With a launch system like the Castor, three guys, a truck and a computer
> isn't at all out of line. With liquid fuel, I think you'd still need a
> larger crew to fuel the vehicle.
How so? It doesn't take a bunch of people to fuel an aircraft.
The DC
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Donald Qualls wrote:
> The same was true of at least one model of Soviet ICBM during the height
> of the Cold War...
> ...I don't recall if this was a storable liquid fuel, or
> solid fuel missile...
Could have been either. The Soviets used liquid fuels for ICBMs, and even
S
My first thoughts on reading
- Sounds too much like a SCUD, we must be anti that here.
- No communications network. You could only talk to satellite a couple of times
a week.
- Lastly a mental image of someone calling your transport service to get a
package to the far side of the gl
Alex Fraser wrote:
> Do the problems come with the scale of the venture? Looking at NASA
> what can you learn about being big. This is what I had in mind. I think
> getting big will be a bigger challenge to ERPS than any technological
> hurdle.
As David W. mentioned, the bigger challenge is to
David Weinshenker wrote:
The WW2-era "V2" IRBM could, as I understand it, be fired by a
couple of operators from a truck... with modern electronic control
systems, a small orbit-capable vehicle might not need much more.
(Three guys, a truck, and a portable computer?)
The same was true of at lea
Randall Clague wrote:
>
> On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 12:10:24 -0500, Alex Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Do the problems come with the scale of the venture? Looking at NASA
> >what can you learn about being big. This is what I had in mind. I think
> >getting big will be a bigger challenge
On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 12:10:24 -0500, Alex Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Do the problems come with the scale of the venture? Looking at NASA
>what can you learn about being big. This is what I had in mind. I think
>getting big will be a bigger challenge to ERPS than any technological
>hurdl
Do the problems come with the scale of the venture? Looking at NASA
what can you learn about being big. This is what I had in mind. I think
getting big will be a bigger challenge to ERPS than any technological
hurdle.
As for dirty linen, I think one thing you see when an organization
gets t
On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 12:49:32 -0500, Alex Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>What internal factions would hinder and what strengths would shine
>through? How exactly on scaling up could ERPS avoid NASA's pitfalls?
Hm. What would a combination of airing our dirty linen in public and
contemplating
Alex Fraser wrote:
>
> Lots of good info about the shuttle burn up. With all the talk of NASA I
> couldn't help musing about ERPS.
> Folks on the list are not actually "there" at NASA and must rely on
> what they read in the press and elsewhere. A similar situation exist for
> me in that I am
Lots of good info about the shuttle burn up. With all the talk of NASA I
couldn't help musing about ERPS.
Folks on the list are not actually "there" at NASA and must rely on
what they read in the press and elsewhere. A similar situation exist for
me in that I am not actually "there" on the scen
23 matches
Mail list logo
