| In article <C5133A.Gzx@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh Hopkins) writes: |
| >>>Titan IV launches ain't cheap |
| >>Granted. But that's because titan IV's are bought by the governemnt. Titan |
| >>III is actually the cheapest way to put a pound in space of all US expendable |
| >>launchers. |
| >In that case it's rather ironic that they are doing so poorly on the commercial |
| >market. Is there a single Titan III on order? |
| The problem with Commercial Titan is that MM has made little or no attempt |
| to market it. They're basically happy with their government business and |
| don't want to have to learn how to sell commercially. |
| A secondary problem is that it is a bit big. They'd need to go after |
| multi-satellite launches, a la Ariane, and that complicates the marketing |
| task quite significantly. |
| They also had some problems with launch facilities at just the wrong time |
| to get them started properly. If memory serves, the pad used for the Mars |
| Observer launch had just come out of heavy refurbishment work that had |
| prevented launches from it for a year or so. |
| There have been a few CT launches. Mars Observer was one of them. So |
| was that stranded Intelsat, and at least one of its brothers that reached |
| orbit properly. |
| All work is one man's work. | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology |
| - Kipling | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry |
|
|
