From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!zeppo!whuxlb!ech Newsgroups: net.space Title: Re: Rocket Planes Article-I.D.: whuxlb.307 Posted: Wed Jun 23 11:56:37 1982 Received: Sun Jun 27 04:31:30 1982 True, we did NOT have the technologies in the early 60s to build the shuttle. But some of us who were around at the time got very upset with NASA/DoD for cancelling the DynaSoar (X-20) and going with non-reusables. Maybe that requires background. I cut my teeth on the visions of Willy Ley and others, who expected us to ENGINEER the conquest of space: build strong technological foundations as you went. Those visionaries expected the development of reusable low-earth-orbit technology followed by permanent manned LEO stations followed by (manned) exploration of the moon and the rest of the solar system, incorporating (are you ready?) APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY as it became available (ion jets, atomic engines, non-aerodynamic vehicles, etc.). The fact is largely forgotten now, but the initial NASA plan was for the Saturn V to be a SMALL PROTOTYPE for an order-of-magnitude larger booster designated Nova. Nova would have delivered a 75-ton Apollo package (command module, service module, lunar takeoff module, lunar landing module) directly from earth surface to lunar surface; that plan was scrubbed only when Gemini demonstrated that we really could accomplish rendevous. I don't retell this to ridicule, merely to illustrate the atmosphere at NASA in the early 60s: brute force was the default method, and the objective was not "get into space" but simply "beat the russians to the moon." Ah, water over the dam. My best hope now is that enough corporations will find LEO an enticing manufacturing environment that funding the shuttle, its successors, and permanent space facilities will simply be good business. Maybe I should learn Japanese... =Ned Horvath=