Re: construction times...

> Mike Elliott wrote:
> >While the comparisons with WWII era ships is useful up to a point, I
don't
> >think it stands up to the extent that Hal has described. If you
compare our
> >present space technology with say the naval technology of the 15th or
16th 
> >century then space craft are a _lot_ smaller. The space shuttle only
has a 
> >crew of 5, Apollo had only 3. Compared to the ships of Columbus thats

> >pretty small.

Columbus didn't need to carry around 99% reaction mass to get to
his destination and back. Given reactionless drives and lots and
lots of energy (like in Full Thrust...), there's no reason to keep
things small.

In the zero-g, frictionless environment of space, there's not much
technical disadvantage to a big ship.

-- 
Be seeing you,
Sam.