Anyone else read the news release at: http://www.rocketplaneglobal.com/press/20071026a.html

There is a long detailed interview at:
http://www.rocketplaneglobal.com/press/20071026a.html

Sounds good for Rocketplane after the Kistler NASA Contract hey!

Any thoughts?

Other than "SWEET!"? No, sorry, that's all I've got.

__________________
I want to go back to the moon.
I don't care which rocket you use, whichever one you pick, I'll like it, I swear.
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek

Rocketplane XP... Sounds like a Windows product.

Shouldn't it be Rocketplane Vista by now?

I don't understand the following comment, though:

The U-2 flies at twice that altitude without an afterburning engine. I've flown as high as 50,000 feet in an airplane without afterburning engines (we were on a long flight and decided to do it just because we could). Couldn't go higher because we didn't have pressure suits (against the regs).



Other than that, more power to them!

__________________
If I set the budget, we'd have Ares and more. Unfortunately, I don't set the budget, and Ares is just too expensive and too far out for us to accomplish our goals within the budget we were given.

If we halt the ISS, all versions of Ares, and transport Orion and Altair aboard DIRECTv3's Jupiter family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, we just might make it back to the Moon by 2020.