> > As you're no doubt thinking, there's quite the jump between 
> hovering 
> > and orbit, and in the final analysis, no chemical rocket system is 
> > ever likely to give us Flash Gordon or Star Wars style 
> flight into/out 
> > of orbit.  The numbers on SSTO (Single-Stage to
> > Orbit) vehicles are absolutely brutal.
> 
> True.
> SSTO if you stay in orbit and don't mind a low payload is 
> entirely doable right now and has been for decades.
> 
> But, if by SSTO you mean "there and back again in one piece", 
> and that's what the term is usually taken to mean, then it's 
> very very very hard and the question which is much debated is 
> 'is SSTO the best way to do it'. ie if you had an eg TSTO 
> (two stage to orbit) system and the first stage could fly 
> home again after use (as is being proposed by a number of 
> people) then why use SSTO. The Jury is still out and will be 
> for a long time.

White Knight for example?

I heard some interesting theories some time ago about a large wedge shaped
balloon that was meant to be, quite literally, flown to very high altitude
then used to launch an orbiting station. It was actually more of a dirigible
(which have always fascinated me) for very high altitude flight. Don't
remember the exact link, but they were building a small version in a huge
hanger. 

---
James.
 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist