Water powered cars by 2009

Thomas 'tmo' Endt wrote:
You didn't even check the calculations...

Yeah, you're right. I accepted what I found on the Wiki page without
checking. Silly me. I'll edit/correct the Wiki page.

So, the figures i came up with for the cost of elemental boron should
have been higher by 400%. That makes this look even less economically
viable.

Ventura wrote:
"Thomas 'tmo' Endt" wrote in message ...

You didn't even check the calculations...

More expensive than a single missile used by the Israel to bomb Lebanon?

About the same price as one of the thousands of missiles that Hezbollah
has been shooting from Lebanon into Israel.

Does that make you happy?

Tchiowa wrote:
Ventura wrote:
"Thomas 'tmo' Endt" wrote in message ...

You didn't even check the calculations...

More expensive than a single missile used by the Israel to bomb Lebanon?

About the same price as one of the thousands of missiles that Hezbollah
has been shooting from Lebanon into Israel.

Does that make you happy?

I saw a news-program "military expert" yesterday estimate the cost of a
katyusha missle at $50, then characterize that as "dead cheap; made by
the thousands". That may not be an unreasonable costing and
characterization for the missle itself. Like a box of cornflakes, the
cost of the logistics to deliver it to the end-user exceeds the cost of
producing the item.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyusha describes a WW-II version as
"propelled by a solid nitrocellulose-based propellant of tubular shape,
arranged in a steel-case rocket engine with a single central nozzle at
the bottom end. The rocket was stabilised by cruciform fins of pressed
sheet steel. The warhead, either fragmentation, high-explosive or
shaped-charge, weighed around 22 kg (48 lb)."

Add a field-expedient launch tube, and you're ready to go.