sciencenaturestm      This is all just diversionary tactics away from the main argument  You just dont want the comparison done  And I do not know if it repays all the capital devt cost or not  But I would like to know from the facts rather than just take it on your say so      Ok lets just let it be known officially Paul has refused to answer my questions  He has refused to back up his assertion which he keeps on making  Consequently Paul is refusing to discuss  Consequently he should not be allowed to edit in this dispute Ill repeat them in case you ever feel like rejoining the discussion Paul   A Do you accept that the space shuttle does not repay its capital costs  B Do you think that rockets apart from the space shuttle  such as Ariane  do repay   C Why do you believe B  Do you have a shred of evidence to support it  D Why is A not clear evidence against B    Ill add one more   E If Ariane was repaying its launch costs why would it have had to have a major bailout recently  Wouldnt they just stop repaying capital costs   lastly as mentioned earlier    I demand a shred of evidence if you are to assert that claim again  Ive presented several pieces of evidence that suggest that its not true the shuttles lack of repayment and the fact that the repayment schedule would have to be incredibly long  It is   I refuse to let this go on without you making it at least   Even if you personally dont like my  your zero is simply unacceptable    PS Preparatory work began in  Full scale development began in  and cost   billion    PPS The page has changed since then but look at this google cache   Notice at the bottom  of the Ariane  contracting team have agreed to reduce their costs to permit Arianespace to assemble fuel and launch an Ariane  rocket for  million euros  Drive another stake in your mistaken notion  NO CAPITAL COSTS  Assemble Fuel and Launch    Rei continues to say I have said things I have not  She is repetitively and dishonestly doing so      Prices   Wolfkeeper has brought up a couple new systems that havent been discussed yet  Soyuz Lets pick on in the series at random  say Soyuz FG  Launch cost m payload  to  degree inclination  Price in  dollarsm Prince in  dollarsm  Just under kkg  Chinese assumedly he means Long March Lets pick a random one the CZA  What do we find   million dollars in    million now kg payload just under kkg again    Ones he mentioned that were already discussed  Sea Launch  Assumedly he means the never built Sea Dragon whose design proved to be not only overly optimistic but an outright failure when a smaller version was built as SEALAR  Or he could mean a number of other things  No I mean sealaunch Hey heres an idea why dont you use google You know research I even included a reference to a data source that gave its launch costs If your google is broken funny how Reis google is always broken when it comes to cheap conventional rocketry Sea Launch is a BoeingRussian joint effort with seriously cheap rockets    Sorry we were discussing the Sea Dragon earlier here which was a neverbuilt rocket that Truax claimed could get spectacular returns  Sea Launch is often used as a generic term you should have stated ZenitSL with a Block DMSL to get to GEO instead of citing the company  Sea Launch is not a rocket  Lets look at the geostationary transfer orbit so we dont have to factor the Block in the ZenitSL itself costs over m in current dollars m in  and has kg payload  Thats almost kg to geosync transfer   Even if you assume that you can get twice as much to LEO thats still not cheap     I did cite ZenitSL you removed that from the article Its not my fault if you dont known what launch vehicle Sea Launch use Actually a LOXKero stage like the third stage of ZenitSL the appropriate multiplier is x giving a price to LEO of kg even with your more pessimistic figures Most other vehicles use hydrogen which is more efficent and then x is more like it