"Lol", "Face it man", you're laser-focused in on a tiny, fairly irrelevant detail of my comment while very ardently ignoring the substantive points. No-one care

"Lol", "Face it man", you're laser-focused in on a tiny, fairly irrelevant detail of my comment while very ardently ignoring the substantive points. No-one cares what shape the rockets are. Fwiw the space plane I was referring to above was SS2, not a NASA vehicle. But yes, I agree, it is unlikely to be good for doing "real work in space". Which is the actual substantive point here, irrespective of vehicle shape. Just to repeat since you seem to have missed it in my comment above: the phallic comment was not, I repeat NOT a literal commentary on rocket design. Yes, good rockets are long and cylindrical. Not what I was referring to.