Is this rocket a fair addition to Comparison of orbital launch systems? Cheers. The program was cancelled earlier this month (October 2011) per Replacement for Soyuz rocket canned by Russia. I was surprised to find no mention of the new Russian launcher, the Rus-M, in this comparison article. Relevant criticism was copied to Talk:Comparison of orbital launchers families. The decision was made to make Comparison of orbital launchers families. Jeffsapko ( talk) 08:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC) The idea is that this shortest list exists together with the actual complex long list. For some comparisons it's better, for others it's worse. Its origin and its goal are different.- FlyAkwa ( talk) 20:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC) Yes, I also agree that there are both benefits and negatives in conflating families into single lines. To avoid any dispute, the idea, as discussed up in this page, is to create a new page, distinct from current list. IanOsgood ( talk) Thank you for your comments. And as GW points out, it can be hard to figure out family groupings. For example, if you only tracked families and their max payloads, you'd think the Atlas V was a very popular heavy lifter, whereas its lightest configuration (401) gets the most use. I like tracking reliability and total launches by family, but it is also instructive to see which members of a family get the most use. How can we take a vote on whether to change the matrix or create a new article with this matrix? user:mnw2000 13:59, 1 October 2011 (UTC) They are both good tables. If there is any confusion as to whether a specific "family" should be split, that can be considered on the talk page. This matrix is much easier to read and understand. The current table considers any variation to be a different launcher. IanOsgood ( talk) 21:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC) Much better than the current table. I would remove cost from this table as it will be hard to verify and is less applicable to a whole family. You will need to make any numeric data like number of launches numerically sortable. FlyAkwa ( talk) 17:51, 30 September 2011 (UTC) I like it! It matches well with my own list (I split Ariane 1/2/3, Delta 2000/3000/E, Atlas-Centaur/GHI, Thorad-Agena, Long March 2CD/2F/3/4, Soyuz/Molniya/Voskhod/Vostok, Titan I/II/III/IV, and Tsyklon 2/3). In French, we say "La perfection n'est pas de ce monde. Finally, perfection doesn't exist, and bias and inaccuracy are inevitable. About the launches count, data are mainly copied from Wikipedia pages. If you think that a launcher is alone or is a family, please say it. All launchers that shares the same base (as described in relatives articles) are in the same family (like Atlas A and G, but not Ariane 4 and 5) : but my list must be perfected. It's only a simplification and compilation. G W … 14:56, 30 September 2011 (UTC) All data are issued from Wikipedia. And where do such precise payload capacities come from for such a wide range of systems? I also think that including launch outcomes should not be done without discussion, since most of the numbers are questionable and it is impossible to present any data without some combination of original research, inconsistency, unverifiability, bias and inaccuracy. FlyAkwa ( talk) 14:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC) What is your criteria for including, for example Atlas A and G in the same category but not Atlas I.
#Onto vs one to one stackexchange full#
This list is mainly based on respective launcher's pages, and also on the current full list. org /wiki /User:FlyAkwa /Comparison _of _orbital _launchers _families