Message-ID: <0ZtWfwi00VcJQA3k5r@andrew.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 90 01:34:37 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V11 #78

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 11 : Issue 78

Today's Topics:
			   Space Digest #70
       Re: Fun Space Fact #1: Launcher Development Costs (long)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:     Fri, 23 Feb 90 14:41 CST
From: <CC01929%SWTEXAS.BITNET@vma.cc.cmu.edu>
Subject:  Space Digest #70

Could you please send me another copy of Space Digest #70? I
accidentally deleted the first one.

Thanks, Chris Conn

------------------------------

Date: 23 Feb 90 17:29:43 GMT
From: samsung!cs.utexas.edu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!henry@think.com  (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Fun Space Fact #1: Launcher Development Costs (long)

In article <3904@oolong.la.locus.com> todd@roulette.UUCP (Todd Johnson) writes:
>>I dimly recall a design sketch from Jordin Kare's group for a laser
>>launcher costing about half a billion dollars that could launch more
>>than the entire shuttle fleet, for that matter.
>
>Henry, what were the anticipated spacecraft loads with the laser
>launcher? Very high g loads would require a greater structural
>mass although this trades off against lower launch costs...

I don't have numbers on hand right now, but G loads were quite low -- you
could launch people with it if you had very small people. :-)  It was on
the order of 5G maximum.  Payload to orbit was something like 20kg, but
launch frequency more than made up for the small size of the individual
loads.
-- 
"The N in NFS stands for Not, |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
or Need, or perhaps Nightmare"| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu

------------------------------

End of SPACE Digest V11 #78
*******************