From: George Sherwood 

On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 13:33:51 +0000, Adam wrote:

> George Sherwood wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 07:00:50 +0000, Adam wrote:
>>

> Only a diff in terms of a bit more money.
>
> Heck the rutan thing broke the X15 record & how costly was the X-15?
>
> "In addition to meeting the altitude requirement to win the X-Prize,
> pilot Brian Binnie also broke the August 22, 1963 record by Joseph A.
> Walker, who flew the X-15 to an unofficial world altitude record of
> 354,200 feet.  Brian Binnie's SpaceShipOne flight carried him all the
> way to 367,442 feet or 69.6 miles above the Earth's surface."
>
> So the next one is a bit bigger & carries more fuel.

So when did the X-15 fly?  Silly comparison and incredibly oversimplified.
 It is much more then a bigger engine and more money to go to orbit.  If
you really think that is the difference then the discussion isn't worth
having. No one on the X-15 felt they were close to putting it in orbit. As
far as the cost, my first 386 cost more then my current P4. What does that
prove?


> The engines may have been tested. I will leave it at that due to the
> security clearance HMG plopped onto all parts of it esp the RB454 engines.
>
> It would have made space (A) too cheap (i.e. not just govs but the
> common man) & (b) Hotol would have made a great bomber & that would have
> been "glabally destabilizing".

You are dreaming about this HOTOL.  It was a design board dream in terms of
cost and performance.  So kind of the British to save us from this terrible
destabilizing weapon.

George

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5