[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: I have an idea. Please read



Actually, Bob, what NASA built was a flying wing-type aircraft,
not a lighter-than-air vehicle. They're also shooting for a far
higher operational altitude, close to 100,000', and a far longer
time on station (months at a time if I remember right) instead
a month or two, which would be OK for the type of application
being disscussed here.

Later,
Andy


On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Bob Bruninga wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Andrew Reynolds wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Bob Bruninga wrote:
> > 
> > > With GPS on the oribter and on the re-fueler drone, and Line-of-sight
> > > low power 2.4 GHz camera video, it woiuld be "trivial" to do an in-flight
> > > refueling.   THus drastically simplifying the design...   Hummh...
> > 
> > Actually, if you stick with a solar-powered vehicle, there is no
> > need to refuel...
> 
> Yes, but thats the problem.  SUch a craft costs about $5,000,000 and took 
> NASA to build it... ;-)
> 

----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home