Subject:
|
Re: F-2 Bat
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Mon, 21 Jul 2003 18:24:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
525 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Anthony Sava wrote:
> In lugnet.space, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > In lugnet.space, Anthony Sava wrote:
> >
> > > So it seems to me, the far {cheapest} option would be to have individual
> > > air locks and small bays for the ships to attach to.
> >
> > If we're talking about small fighters, might it be cheaper to have your
> > pilots wear evac suits in a non-pressurized landing bay? Entry to the bay
> > could be through a single airlock, and the individual ships could be moored
> > or clamped into place by whatever mechanism is favored. Ships could even
> > be kept in a huge "file-drawer" storage locker and only rolled out for
> > flights. They could even be put into a secondary launch bay, I guess.
> > I suppose that this wouldn't be a good system for large-capacity
> > passenger or freight vessels, but it might solve part of the problem.
> I love that idea. But Mark was talking about cost-effectiveness, and my
> belief is that this way would be a tad bit more expensive to build and
> maintain.
Expensive? Bah! I build my ships out of solid gold with platinum wiring and
diamond-encrusted control surfaces. Phooey on your bean counting!
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: F-2 Bat
|
| (...) I love that idea. But Mark was talking about cost-effectiveness, and my belief is that this way would be a tad bit more expensive to build and maintain. --Anthony (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space)
|
23 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
