Xref: utzoo sci.aeronautics:72 sci.space:14256 sci.space.shuttle:3697 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!eos!eugene From: eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya) Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics,sci.space,sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: Concorde, NASP, shuttles Message-ID: <5286@eos.UUCP> Date: 29 Sep 89 01:01:13 GMT References: <4983@omepd.UUCP> <45e95c54.71d0@apollo.HP.COM> <18952@ut-emx.UUCP> Reply-To: eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya) Distribution: usa Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Calif. Lines: 25 It's not clear to me that SSTs will ever be economical forms of transport. Significant advances in propulsion systems are required. At least in the near future. I would not say the two US SST proposals significantly differed from the slightly smaller Concorde in size. They were in the same size class. New Pacific markets might make a difference, but Garrett Hardin, the biologist, wrote a letter to Science noting that a 2 hour flight to Tokyo would only put a person there "in the middle of the night." "Economic markets can't be a serious consideration," but I am certainly aware of the companies who do much Concorde business. But then who in the US wants to do business in Japan? 8) Okay, Korea, or China, etc. (Big eh?) Today Brian Toon gave a seminar on the ozone hole and SSTs were once again raised as a concern. But then some of this is my opinion. Another gross generalization from --eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: "You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?" "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology." {ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!eugene Live free or die.