How many years John

ok, Dan... please read this post all the way through, as you do not seem to be doing so
I am trying to have a logical conversation, something you should be able to appreciate.

I was not spouting orders for one. You started this thread on the topic that Armadillo should be putting things into Orbit, right? so I asked you to detail for me what the costs of such an endeavor would be. That way we would have a good solid FACTUAL baseline by which to further progress a conversation.

Again I find it funny that you refuse to do any legwork yourself, yet expect others to do anything for you, and then criticizing them for not doing things to your liking. (see the following http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_seat_ ... ted_Idioms)

Now, you again assume that John has all the money needed to push to orbit like you say.
How will we know if this is true or not if you do not help provide cost estimates (based on real calculations) to prove your point. and further prove your point by posting those calculations.

I'm not trying to work against you here, Dan. I am just trying to establish a firm baseline such that an actual intelligent debate on the facts can commence.

You want things to get done? then lets find a way to get them done like civilized people. No more of this pointing fingers, and "oh my god you are all mindless drivellers" bull crap. you want progress Dan?
You want to get away from the "evils" of NASA?
then cut the crap. Because to me, all the "I'm better than all you you" garbage is doing nothing but hindering the progress you so seek.

I await an intelligent reply.

Mike

MFL, you haven't been civilized. you call me a arm chair quarterback yet you say you are not fighting me and want to hear more about my idea.
Don't be so emotionally immature that you have to scream and attack me before you skulk at me wanting to know me better, like a hungry wild animal seeking shelter from the storm.
try to realize that you like the idea and you would like to know more. that would be thoughtful

Well, I could have predicted Dans response to you. I don't have a couple of days to spare working on Dans problem for him, but I will venture an estimate. Not to be taken seriously, but I think it is going to be in a realistic range. Lets say a range of €4-8 million for R&D costs for the telescope, and each telescope could then be built for €100000.

A network of ground tracking stations, each covering 250,000km^2, would require 600 of them. Lets suppose that the components could be bought in bulk in Denmark and shipped from Dans house to the sites around the world. We might get a good discount that way and each site could be built for between €8-12 thousand. So a total of €4.8-7.2 million for ground tracking.

Now to the issue of the launch. I remember one of the AA guys saying that they expected 3 failures before they had a successful orbital launch, so that will have to be added to the expenses. Each launch vehicle is supposed to be reusable but obviously the crashed ones won't be. So scratch €3 million in wasteful R&D by rushing too quickly through the development. Current Russian prices for LEO orbit are about €4000/kg. I'd be surprised if AA could beat that because the larger launch vehicles are more efficient. Lets assume that the price is going to be in the range of €4000-€6000/kg, so €40000-€60000 per launch.

So I'm going to estimate, initial sunk costs of €11.8-18.2 million and a per launch cost of €140000-160000 after that. Each telescope would probably only last about 3-6 months in orbit due to the low quality of the construction. So replacements would be required on a regular basis, say every 140-160 days. Suppose the people maintaining the ground stations get to use the telescope for 2 days each, that leaves 20-40 days of commercial operations for each telescope.

Of course none of this takes into account the problem of scheduling time on a satellite with no fuel or thrusters. It will spend 70% of its time flying over ocean which has no tracking station and no features worth photographing. So the 20-40 days becomes 7-14 days. Maybe take out 50% for time spent flying over desert/artic/unpopulated areas and you have 3.5-7 billable days. To simplify the numbers lets call it 100-200 billable hours. To break even on the running costs of the operation you would have to charge clients in the region of €1000/hour for use of the telescope. That's in the same ballpark as what they would pay to purchase their own 250mm telescope. http://telescope-service.com/Celestron/ ... html#NT250.

There's still the small issue of the €11.8-18.2 million which has to be amortised over a number of years.

I've no idea how that's gonna work out.

hey I just discovered a website that solves all these problems without needing another satellite. http://maps.google.com

johno

sigh, my fellow man. what will become of you

Wow Dan-o, just ... wow. you don't hesitate to berate others and jump down their throat, yet someone looks at you wrong and you get hugely defensive.

Yeah, no, I don't like your idea. Neither the telescope nor the Armadillo orbital idea.
While i do like the idea of VTVL for suborbital/extreme altitude hops, and even transcontinental hops, I do not believe VTVL to orbit is the best way to go. Just my opinion, but then that may not even be the route they would have chosen either.

as for the telescope.... to me that is a waste of money that could be better spent on engine research, etc.
sometimes a publicity stunt (i.e. launch the payload, orbit a few times, take a few pics, re-enter the bird) can be worth it if it can draw more investors to your company. Nowadays.... it wouldn't.



nailed it right on the head

Johno, thanks for the response. while your estimates are probably on the conservative side (Wouldn't know, especially because they are in that weird currency ), they do put into perspective of the costs that are involved. And that they are not small. especially for a company as small as Armadillo.
I am starting to see how you think Dan is a bot though. Especially since he has yet referred to me by my name (yeah, not a great indicator, i know, lol).

You know Danny-boy, I had been planning to continue work on my CSP* system tonight, but i couldn't pass up the fun of posting in this farce opposite you.


the Sparky from Houston,
Mike

*CSP - Concentrated Solar Power, want more info, feel free to ask/email/PM etc

Funny thing, not listening,..



MFL, go do you solar power stuff. That is infinitely more worthwhile than this debacle. This discussion should have ended and Dan banned a long while back in my humble opinion.

You folks have far better things to do and more interesting things to discuss.

I'm gonna go do some work, myself.

How dare you foist your morals on me! What does it matter to you if We kill jesus or not? Who says that Judaism is wrong and that you are right? And why exactly are you against the Germans killing off millions of Jews? What's so wrong with it?

Look SuperShuki we gave you a warning about this, and why because we got complaints about your statements. So please keep them to yourself. If that is not possible then this will be the last thing you have said on this forum.

And I mean it, I'm not as forgiving as Sigurd, this is a space forum and I want to keep it that way!

So move my posts to the "religion and space" topic.

Also this is not a space forum, this is a Dan forum. I just replied to Dan. Dan didn't seem insulted by what I wrote. So why should you?

SuperShuki has been banned for 7 days from the Space Fellowship.
Attacking or challenging anyone based on religion is not allowed on this website and will be acted upon with zero tolerance from now on.

Second ban is 1 month, third time is permanently.

his expressions is not why you itch to ban him. let him express himself and let him learn, not through mindless use of force against him but through the step of truth. let it be spoken and let it be seen and woe is he who will stifle a chosen one.
vengeance is His and His alone.

Oh FFS,

I thought the hours I had spent debunking the bullshit in this thread had successfully killed it.
Now it's back!

Let it die will you.

johno

johno, you didn't think

Dan, then that's content for an other website, not this one. Especially as the truth is different to most of us. So back to space, way better topic to talk about.