Why private companies are not as reliable

Space/Science » in reply to Yah, one failure from known, easily correctable reasons = 'doesn't work' (eye rolls)

Raoul — 8/10/2009 7:37:14 PM (archived)

Didn't Mc Donnell-Douglas know what was at stake if they lost the prototype?

Known, easily correctible reasons? Well, they didn't prevent nor correct them!!

Besides, the concept meant they needed to carry enough fuel back from space (meaning a heavier rocket to start with) in order to gently land on the ground !

There are reasons why the next generation of manned spacecrafts are small wingless capsules.

The whole thread (10 posts)

Nuclear DC-X - Adam - 8/9/2009 11:17:22 PM
- re: Nuclear DC-X - phil - 8/10/2009 2:37:12 AM
  - The chosen design didn't work... - Adam - 8/10/2009 10:48:36 AM
    - Vertical landing didn't work (n/t) - E.P. - 8/10/2009 3:56:21 PM
      - That works just fine... - Adam - 8/12/2009 4:41:06 AM
      - Yah, one failure from known, easily correctable reasons = 'doesn't work' (eye rolls) (n/t) - phil - 8/10/2009 4:07:41 PM
        
        Why private companies are not as reliable - Raoul - 8/10/2009 7:37:14 PM
        
        Yeah, no national space program vehicles have ever crashed. (n/t) - TB - 8/11/2009 3:57:22 AM
        
        re: Yeah, and that's exactely why it's so expensive, long to take and bureaucratic! - Raoul - 8/11/2009 5:21:46 AM
        
        DC-X a BNDO Project - phil - 8/11/2009 1:21:09 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Space/Science

The whole thread (10 posts)