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=