While performing some calculations based on the results in
my paper on nanotechnology implications of space systems,
I discovered an error in table 3, about which I wish to
alert readers. The first and third column of 'Cost per kg
to reference orbit' are out of proportion.
The paper purports that the first column of 'Cost per kg
to reference orbit', ranging from $14k to $59k,
is based on a per mission cost estimate of $1000 per
kg of dry, empty launch vehicle mass, but the
actual numbers correspond to a cost estimate of $5000 per
kg. Thus, the ratio between the first and third columns
is overstated by a factor of five. If the numbers
shown in the first column are reasonable estimates of achievable
cost to orbit for a new, titanium-based fully reusable
rocket system, then the costs for an MNT-based system using
the same cost model ought to be a factor of five higher than
shown in the third column. If one accepts that the costs
in the first column could reasonably be a factor of five lower
than shown, then the MNT-based third column is acceptable
as is.
This error does not impact the second column of 'Cost per
kg to reference orbit', nor any other aspect of the paper.