>Lauer favors spaceplanes because they’re safer than launching rockets.
“And there are several companies building them right now,” he said in his presentation. “They’re basically an aircraft with a variety of engines, whether it’s a scramjet engine or rockets. It takes off and lands like an aircraft and it’s made of titanium. You can launch it and re-enter, and you can do it over and over again. And it’s a lot safer.”
Although some of Lauer’s website visuals and early plans call for a launching pad, Lauer said his development’s focus will be on horizontal takeoffs and landings and not launches.
Which companies? The only company that I’m aware of developing a horizontal takeoff and landing system is Radian, and they need a sled. To quote the former senator from Wisconsin in a different context, I wouldn’t give him one penny for this nutty fantasy.
I’m attending AIAA ASCEND tomorrow through Thursday (ad in left column). I’ll take the laptop, but not sure how much time I’ll have to blog. It’s a very busy schedule, with multiple sessions in parallel.
This doesn’t make much sense, though: “…the hardware itself will have to be deorbited when it reaches end-of-life. ‘ESA has a Clean Space Initiative. Anything that we’re sending to space, we have to think about the whole lifecycle, cradle to grave,’ Caplin said.”
It’s loony tunes to think that we’d deorbit something that size from GEO. It will be repurposed in some way in space, or at least go to a graveyard orbit.
SpaceX issued the following statement regarding the mishap on the Falcon 9 upper stage that occurred during last night's Starlink 9-3 mission: pic.twitter.com/PRiLPBTXLi
I can obviously understand the need for an investigation, and if SpaceX wants to do it with the FAA, that’s fine, but the FAA should have no say in when it flies again; that would be them doing mission assurance, which is not part of their charter. NASA, Jared Isaacman, or any of SpaceX’s other customers can decide when and whether they trust the vehicle, but FAA advisement should be just that. There was no public danger from this event (other than potential Starlink debris falling to earth), or reason to think there would be from any future similar failure.