Slashdot Mirror

Voyager 2 got to Neptune in about 12 years. Pluto was actually closer than Neptune during that time. I guess it could still have taken longer to get to Pluto because of the positions of other planets that you'd use for a gravity assist, but I really doubt it'd take an entire generation.

As a note about fully mapping mercury, it seems to be one of the forgotten planets nobody talks about much, but has had some attention in the past.

Still, there are some interesting Mariner shots of the planet online. Not quite half has been mapped yet, but there's some interesting features that make it unique.

nude macgirls webcam

The main differences from traditional RC hobbyists were the onboard telemetry system, and the means of getting some of these models launched.

One of the primary programs in which I participated involved the use of a sailplane model. Rather than launching from a big slingshot, like most hobbyists, we modified an Eagle-style RC trainer with a mount to carry the sailplane, and we literally flew the stacked planes up to altitude using the powered model for thrust, then did an inflight separation (somewhat like Enterprise shuttle coming off the top of a 747 during very early shuttle program tests).

Also, the NASA folks had a pretty interesting telemetry (remote data collection) setup, which reversed the conventional use of a stock RC radio. The transmitter was mounted in the airplane, and the control sticks taken apart and hooked up to various sensors, and the receiver was on the ground, with the servos hooked up to pens on paper rolls. That way, whenever the onboard sensors moved, the pens also moved. A poor-man's remote sensing system, for just a few hundred dollars!

The results of this work have shown up in many places - from sailplane wing design to general-aviation stall prevention devices to high-visibility X-plane programs.

Granted, in 1989 when I did this work, autonomous flight was rare, and we did all this work by piloted remote control, but my point is that it was done for just hundreds of dollars per model, not multiple thousands. Yes, the government sometimes DOES save money.

I can give you a couple of hints for the area around Baltimore and Washington:
As well as checking out the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum go see the restoration facility where they actually work on the planes. They have so many planes they will be working on them for years. You can tell the un-restored ones by the oil dripping from the engines

Skip the spy museum and go see the the real spy museum, the NSA museum. They let you play with a real German Enigma machine that is right next to the electro-mechanical computer that cracked it's codes. The NSA is so secretive with their information that I didn't find out until later what was the key that allowed a machine to recognize when it found the right key in an encrypted message. It was because the German message always started with the same format.

For the best collection of railroad engines in the world check out the B&O Railroad museum in Baltimore, just visiting the parking lot you can see, touch, and climb on 15 or 20 historic steam engines

You can definitely feel the ionic wind underneath the thing.

I've often wondered where the UFO mythology came from. Academics talk about cold war paranoia and the semiotics of the space age. Being of a more prosaic turn of mind, I've always assumed that stories about the AvroCar grew in the telling. But now it just turns out that a bunch of nitwits can't distinguish ozone from antigravity. Yep, the truth's out there all right, but I'm too tired to look for it!

Germany created and flew the first jet fighters.

True, and the first rocket fighter, the Messerschmitt Me-263 `Komet' and later the Bachem Be349 `Natter'.

Unfortunately for them, the war was almost over already.

That wasn't the problem. The problem was that Hitler was a gonzo and first prevaricated, then ordered that they be built for bombing - which they were mediocre at, rather than air defense - which they were good at. Mind you, some of the big Yank prop planes could still catch them and shoot them down with a diving start.

Commercial jets are descended from those planes.

No, commercial jets were quite different in design from the start. The British Meteor jet fighters did look quite similar to the 262. However, many of our modern rockets are descended in one way or another from the V2.

The really innovative German 'planes were the Blohm und Voss models. My personal favourites are the asymmetrical 237 and mid-engined mid-propped 192, although other models like the 111 and 170 have their own special shock value too. (-:

...maybe we could just lock in the coordinates on our freight transporter and teleport it directly into the sun. You're thinking 1000 years, not 100. Think of what we have accomplished in the past 100 years and stop being ridiculously optimistic.

Wrong

Images are here:

http://www.nasm.edu/ceps/etp/uranus/uran_moons.htm l

Now, the thing that puzzles me is that this guys theory isn't any different from the previous theory.

The "explosion" (aka impact by comet or something) theory says that the act of the moon heating up as it reformed caused volcanic like activity, which stopped when the moon finally settled.

The new theory says that some random and undetermined force (maybe tidal forces, maybe something else) caused the moon to heat up and cause volcanic like activity. Um, that's the same thing! All this theory does is say "no, it wasn't an impact that caused this! It was... Something Else!" What else? "Well, we're not sure, but man this is getting me good publicity for my PhD!"

*sigh*

Ground laser launching relies on superheating air, plus it's only been used to shove vehicles directly up, so it's basically a really cool but expensive way to replace July 4 bottle rockets.

And anyway, the EZ-Rocket DOESN'T use hydrogen peroxide, so your comment isn't really relevant to its engine.

Check out the Smithsonian's web page for some info.

These kinds of feats just don't have the glamor they used to. Especially since his gondola is all tricked out with hi-tech stuff. The balloon even flies itself so that he can sleep. I understand that this is a very tough feat, particularly since this is his 5th attempt at it, but it just doesn't have that extra dimension that makes it very exciting (it isn't a first circumnavigation, because that was done in the 16th century; it doesn't demonstrate the possibilites of future transport or a smaller world; it doesn't have great political implications; nor is it a demonstration of new technologies and engineering). I doubt that 100,000 people will storm the landing zone in celebration if he does make it around.

Uh, that's not how the date line works. Australia is usually a day ahead of the US.
From http://www.nasm.edu/apollo/AS11/a11facts.htm:

Landed on Moon: July 20, 1969 20:17:40 UT (4:17:40 p.m. EDT)
First step: 02:56:15 UT July 21, 1969 (10:56:15 p.m. EDT July 20, 1969)

That means it was July 21, 1969 in Australia when man first set foot on the moon. So that date is off by two days.

Duh.

Its processing speeds, of around 150 million floating point operations per second, were far above anything else that the time of its announcement in 1976. Those speeds are now matched by inexpensive workstations that fit on a person's desk.

And the golf club is on display at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC. Stepping into the main lobby of the NASM is simply awesome as they have the Voyager (1st around the world, non-stop, no refueling), X-1 (Yeager's plane), Wright 1903 Flyer, the X-15, and the Spirit of St Louis hanging from the ceiling.

Don't know if it is a mock-up though. Lots of cool stuff like the star destroyer and x-wing are purported to be original production effects models, but some of the other stuff was mocked-up (Like the Darth Vader costume IIRC)

The resident computer historian at the Smithsonian is Paul Ceruzzi; a very knowledgeable guy. So they already have someone, but other museums might not.

This happens every 228 years (Pluto is closer for 20 years)

Check out this link.

For everyone who can't/won't do a google search themselves. ;-)

Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL)
www.google.com/search?q =Air+Force+MOL+&num=10&lc=www
www.airspacemag.com/ ASM/Mag/Index/1998/JJ/Contents.html
www.farhills.org/s/lees/space/air force.htm


Dyna Soar
www.google.com/search?q=dynasoar&lc= www
www.google.com/search?q=dyna+soar+%2Bsmithsonian&n um=10&lc=www&btnG=Google+Search BR> www.arnold.af.mil/aedc/systems/60- 933.htm
www.nasm.edu/galle ries/gal114/SpaceRace/sec500/sec540.htm
www.hq.nasa.gov/offi ce/pao/History/Timeline/1961-4.html

Blue Gemini
www.google.com/search?q=Bl ue+Gemini&num=10&lc=www
student.uq.edu.au/~s373901/land /coldwar.htm
www.hq.nasa.gov/office/ pao/History/SP-4203/ch6-2.htm

LK Lander
www.google.com/search? q=%2BLK+%2BLander&num=10&lc=www
www.interaxs.net/pub/spacey/lk1.htm
www.ninfinger.org/~sven/mode ls/sovietsp/lk.html

Spiral
www.google.com /search?q=%2BSpiral+%2Bspacecraft&num=10&lc=www
www.mcs.net/~rusaerog/spiral/spiral .html

General Spacecraft info
www.rocketry.com/mwade/spaceflt.htm Encyclopedia Astronautica

Hmm, a large, stable object already in Earth orbit.

Now where would we find something like that?

Too bad it'd be beyond our technology to get there.