<font color="yellow">My challenge to any one who just states that it won’t or can’t work is this. <br /><br />Have you done the detailed design work for the ship (that the company has not done yet (Phase 1)) to determine why it won’t work and can you think of ways to solve your own reasons on why it won’t work? <br /><br />Or are you simply saying it won't work because your narrow minded, short sighted, stuck in the past and can't solve your own problems? </font><br /><br />You have the arugment upside down. It's you who must show why your concept will work, not the other way around. <br /><br />Challenging people to tell you why your concept won't work is just another to solicit ideas and experience for free.<br /><br />There are things that people have observed, learned & have shown consistent & repeatable events, they bundled these observed behaviors, group them with correct ground rules & assumptions, and called them "science". People further developed a subset of principles of how materials behave and how to process to do what they want, they called it "engineering". In that subset, people further observed there's a systematic approach to problem solving and to manage complex technical projects, they developed a discipline as a science called "systems engineering". <br /><br />People spend a majority of their life understanding and mastering a tiny fraction of this subset called 'aerospace engineering'. Most of the stuff discussed on the Mission & Launch board are high sophicated. If one does this for a living, it would require the level of Master Degree in Engineering plus 10 to 20 yr experience to be able to do the design & analysis for these complex systems. <br /><br />Because of these learned experience, and because this is a 'public forum', people are kind enough to 'share' with you and let you know you're heading down the wrong path. You would benefit a lot to eat some humble pie and learn to ask questions instead of argue with <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>