I guess anybody who did see it most likely thought I would correct it eventually, but it took several days to do it. It really is embarrassing, but on the other hand, nobody is seeing this anyway. Or are they?
I think I checked this on the web before I posted, but maybe I just got some bad information. I don't go to church often, or, otherwise, I could have checked it out with someone there who would have known.
I take mistakes seriously. I like to keep things accurate. It bothers me to have one this glaringly bad.
Update: ( a few moments later)
Rather than to set up an entirely new post, I will use this opportunity to discuss the email question I sent to the Space Show yesterday. It is somewhat related to this idea behind this post. The question is, was this what you would call a "dumb question"? I want to explore that and keep coming back here throughout the day in order to attempt to answer that question to my satisfaction. Stay tuned.
Update: 9:16 am
Just read this interesting post on Wikipedia about Aerojet. This was where Robert Truax worked when he was working on the Sea Dragon project.
Aerojet is still in business. As a matter of fact, here is how the Wikipedia entry ends
In November 2010, Aerojet was selected by NASA for consideration for potential contract awards for heavy lift launch vehicle system concepts, and propulsion technologies
I don't know what this means, in terms of actual proposals. I can try to find out, but I don't know what I might find. I will keep looking and report back here. Keep tuned.
Update: 9:36 am
Aerojet is owned by GenCorp, which was formerly known as General Tire. I used to be in the tire business myself. Interesting to see how the old names are up to these days. The Wikipedia says 3000 employees and revenues for 2009 just short of 800 million dollars. They are big, but there are those who are bigger.
Here's a link to their corporate news page.
Since Sea Dragon was an old concept from many years ago, it may seem unrealistic for them to be interested in dusting off the old idea and taking another shot at getting a contract based upon this proposal. However, it really does seem the address the launch cost issue in a dramatic way.
It may not get costs down to that which may have been claimed for it, but the idea that it could lower costs is credible to me because of the possibility of economy of scale. It would take the mastery of a lot of "if" questions, such as "if" you can find a market for this much lift, "if" such as system can actually fly, "if" you can get insurance for the launch ( brought up on the Space Show), "if" Congress can be persuaded to go this direction. The biggest "if" question is "if" Congress has the capacity to do this, which would be radically new.
Stay tuned, I'm not done with this yet.
Update:
GenCorp is a sponsor of a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation, described here in this news release in 2010. It doesn't have anything to do with Sea Dragon, so far as I know. Frankly, I doubt if Sea Dragon is being considered at all. Could any interest ever be generated in dusting off the old idea? Or is it forever relegated to the dustbin of history?
If I brought it up, and if it is dismissed so easily, then I did make a mistake. But am I the one who making the biggest mistake? If you have something that can work, why not try to make it work? It is old technology, but the need is real, and the need is now. It is a simple idea, so it fits the KISS principle. It has economies of scale, in terms of its size, but also its replication, and thus frequency of launch. This is more potential than fact, but if you just got stuff up there in great quantities, uses could be found for it. Such as propellant and life support for deep space missions.
I think that does it for this post.
No comments:
Post a Comment