When is it my turn?
by
w33t
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It is so inspiring to see that shuttle blast into orbit. Such a technological achievement, such an affirmation of the power and beauty science has brought to us.
And yet, here alongside these feelings of grandeur in my heart are these off-putting notions of what the shuttle actually means. How, even though it's one of the most amazing creations in the history of mankind, it represents so many of our failings.
The cost of a shuttle launch, while great, is dwarfed by the day-to-day costs of modern wars.
The shuttle, while technologically impressive, is still very much a cut-back version of what it was intended to be.
If you have the time I recommend watching and listening to Rutan's adress to the National Space Society.
Rutan makes many points to ponder - which highlight questions I myself have wondered. For instance, why can't I fly to space yet? Why is it so hard?
Burt Rutan makes the observation that when he saw the Redstone rocket at the national air museum he wondered, "why don't we fly this anymore?".
Indeed why! It's cheap, it's simple - simpler can and often does mean safer. The Redstone can get a person or two into orbit. And why not launch a couple a week? Burt Rutan goes on to point out that after each new space vehicle is created the old designs are never used again.
He states that if we followed this philosophy with aircraft we would have only one airplane flying right now, the B2 bomber!
I don't mean to be a naysayer on this great launch day. I don't mean to steal thunder from such a remarkable achievement (and few are greater fans of the space shuttle than myself). But I think there is a problem with NASA's philosophy of what space exploration is - what it means to the average person.
For me, space exploration means the exploration of space. And I want to be the explorer.
As far as I know, NASA doesn't have me slated for any launches in the foreseeable future.
Re:When is it my turn?
by
QuantumG
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Two years ago the X-Prize was won. Since then, no-one has had the opportunity to buy a suborbital flight. The vehicle that won the X-Prize is hanging in the Smithsonian. The spinoff of that vehicle (Virgin Galactic) won't be opening its doors for 4 more years. It would appear that the only people with the means to make suborbital space tourism a reality no longer have the motivation to do it as fast as possible. Maybe this just means other groups will have time to play catch up, but when you consider that suborbital is just the first step of many in commercial space flight, you gotta wonder when, if ever, we'll get our turn.
-- How we know is more important than what we know.
Re:When is it my turn?
by
bruce_the_loon
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Burt Rutan makes the observation that when he saw the Redstone rocket at the national air museum he wondered, "why don't we fly this anymore?".
Indeed why! It's cheap, it's simple - simpler can and often does mean safer. The Redstone can get a person or two into orbit. And why not launch a couple a week? Burt Rutan goes on to point out that after each new space vehicle is created the old designs are never used again.
Rutan does have a point, but the Redstone isn't a good example. It never took a man into full orbit, only the sub-orbital run and it was bettered by the Atlas which got Glenn into orbit. It was never powerful enough for orbital launch.
If anything he should be talking about Atlas and Titan. Which have evolved into the new EELV systems that the military are using. So the designs and evolutions are still there.
The Saturn 5 was a massive beast of a launcher, but they canned it after Apollo. With a heavy lifter like that, NASA could have launched the space station in half the time and much safer. And now they are redesigning the whole heavy-lift launch vehicle for the Moon project.
-- Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
Re:When is it my turn?
by
dj245
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Burt Rutan makes the observation that when he saw the Redstone rocket at the national air museum he wondered, "why don't we fly this anymore?".
In doing some reading on the Redstone rocket I came across this odd duck. A medium range ICBM that flew a total distance of 4 inches (100mm).
-- Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
Re:When is it my turn?
by
quanticle
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
No, it can't. Redstone could only launch an astronaut on a very short suborbital hop. A substantially larger rocket is needed to get a human into orbit.
Ok, so the Redstone's no good anymore. But why scrap Gemini? That was good enough for orbital flight. Why scrap the Saturn? That was good for going to the moon, and it could have "retired" as a heavy-lift cargo vehicle. Rutan's main point remains: why did NASA scrap the older launch systems (like Saturn) after the advent of the new system? Even if they didn't have the money to maintain 2 concurrent launch systems, they could have released the plans to private industry, so that these "tried and true" vehicles could be put to commercial use.
-- We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
Re:When is it my turn?
by
Lumpy
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
It is so inspiring to see that shuttle blast into orbit.
you have no idea. My daughter and I were 20+ miles away at my brothers home and watched the column of smoke rise in the sky. She is 14 and is of the "whatever" generation not caring about anything. I pointed at the sky and said, "there goes the shuttle" and she turned into an 8 year old kid once again. She then marvelled at the fact that I mentioned that I watched the exact same thing when I was 14 and that she will probably be the last of the family to ever witness a shuttle launch.
Seeing it for real although miles away is more awe inspiring... Even for a who cares 14 year old girl that still thinks emo is cool and that adults are stupid.
And my family though I was mential for vacationing in florida in early july... I was given one of those father daughter moments that will be in her memory long after I am gone.
That's how awe inspiring it is.
-- Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:When is it my turn?
by
cyclone96
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Even if they didn't have the money to maintain 2 concurrent launch systems, they could have released the plans to private industry, so that these "tried and true" vehicles could be put to commercial use.
A lot of the older systems did make it to private industry (although that's an odd way of putting it, NASA didn't build rockets, they contracted Lockheed, Martin Marietta, etc. to do it for them - private industry already had the plans - they developed them).
Most of the commercial American heavy launch vehicles (Boeing Delta, Lockheed-Martin Atlas) have their early roots in the NASA and military space and missile programs in the early 60's. In fact, the government has a vested interest in commerical exploitation of launch vehicles, since the more that are built, the lower the unit cost for government launches.
Now, if you are talking about the Saturn V...there simply was not a commercially viable market for a launcher of that size in the 1970s. If there was one, industry would have been free to exploit it. Even the government (traditionally the customer for very heavy launchers, even today) never used the Saturn V outside of the Apollo and Skylab launches. While many bemoan the fact that the infrastructure for the Saturn V was not maintained, the decision was made that it was not of enough national significance to do so when Congress and the Executive branch (not NASA) made the decision to shut down that program.
-- Worst...sig...ever!
Re:When is it my turn?
by
tftp
·
· Score: 4, Informative
don't think even the ruskies stuff can rival the saturn 5
The Energiya booster is configurable to 400,000 lbs, and that exceeds the 285,000 lbs orbital lift capacity of Saturn V. This is not surprising, given that Energiya was designed decades later and was using the latest technologies.
There were only two flights of Energiya, compared to 32 of Saturn V, and it is not manufactured any more. However its technology is not only up to date, it is being actively used in other boosters. So if anyone wants to lift 175 tons to the orbit, it can be done. It only costs money. See here for available configurations.
If you really need to launch anything that heavy, it would be cheaper and smarter to pay for manufacturing of Energiya rather than for redesign and manufacturing of Saturn V, and you get more bang for the buck at the same time. Engines of that power that are time-tested and proven to be OK are invaluable.
I'd bet NASA could make just as awe-inspiring of a spectacle by lighting fire to a billion one-dollar bills soaked in jet fuel.
Re:When is it my turn?
by
Moofie
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Two years? Two whole years? Those darn slackers.
Get some perspective. You want a real failure? How about going to the Moon 35 years ago, and then dicking around in LEO ever since then. THAT is a travesty.
-- I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
Re:Just want to say...
by
RabidMonkey
·
· Score: 5, Funny
yes, but 'engineerspeed' doesn't really sound as motivational. or as fast.
-- We emerge from our mother's womb an unformatted diskette; our culture formats us.
- Douglas Coupland
Re:Just want to say...
by
Ortega-Starfire
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Godspeed is a nominalization of the phrase God speed (you), understanding which depends on two things: speed in this sense means 'to prosper; succeed', which is now archaic, but which is the original sense of the word; and the verb is subjunctive, expressing a wish, with the entire phrase meaning "may God cause you to succeed." Semantic parallels are such common expressions as God bless you or God forbid!; another nominalization is goddamn (as in "I don't give a good goddamn what you think"), shortened from God damn you. http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=1 9980129
So Goddamn you for nitpicking something as simple as a phrase which in this day and age is just the same as saying "Good Luck."
Oh, Yeah. Godspeed!
-- ---- Liquid was a patriot ----
"The mst complex machine ever built, blaah, blaah"
by
EmbeddedJanitor
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Still trying to drum up some backing.... Since when is complexity a good thing? The space shuttle is really far more complex than it needs to be and is far less reliable than it needs to be to do a proper job. While this complex machine falls part, Russian "pickup truck"-style space vehicles just get on with the job with little fanfare.
-- Engineering is the art of compromise.
It's not the launch that matters anymore
by
MrNougat
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Granted, a launch is the controlled ignition of the largest bottle rocket ever made, and that's dangerous. But isn't the primary concern these days the foam breaking off of the fuel tank and damaging heat tiles, which don't matter until re-entry? Post again when it's touched down on earth safely, please.
-- Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
Re:It's not the launch that matters anymore
by
enitime
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"But isn't the primary concern these days the foam breaking off of the fuel tank and damaging heat tiles, which don't matter until re-entry?"
Probably mostly because that's what went wrong most recently. One shuttle has been lost during take-off, one during re-entry. I think is small sigh of relief that all is well so far is justified.
The launch went great
by
nurb432
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Lets hope the LANDING goes just as well.
-- ---- Booth was a patriot ----
It's not successful yet.
by
localroger
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It's successful when it lands and the astronauts step back onto terra firma. Especially, as other comenters have already mentioned, given how swimmingly the last Columbia mission was going until the last few minutes.
-- Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
It was a loud one !
by
Dolphinzilla
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
watched it live from my front yard in Titusville - the wind was perfect and it was the loudest launch I have heard in a long time - my garage door was rattling for a good 5 or 6 minutes - perfect launch for the 4th of July !!
Re:It was a loud one !
by
Tackhead
·
· Score: 5, Funny
> watched it live from my front yard in Titusville - the wind was perfect and it was the loudest launch I have heard in a long time - my garage door was rattling for a good 5 or 6 minutes - perfect launch for the
4th of July !!
As long as Slashdot's a good 4 hours behind the times, let's get this outa the way too.
--- BEGIN INTERCEPTED TRANSMISSION --- "Meh. Running Imperialist Lackey Dogs! Their shuttle pales in comparison to the People's Glorious Three-Part Fireworks Display that Dear Leader has orchestrated downrange of Pyongyang!" --- END INTERCEPTED TRANSMISSION ---
Perfect finish to the Fourth, indeed, even if I didn't get to see the Shuttle launch and didn't have a need to know what happened to the non-decoy part of Kim's little fireworks show:)
Nice try, Kim. No cigar. You still so ronery.
Yeah, it was safe...
by
caluml
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
There were reports on the BBC from NASA officials that four pieces of foam had broken off the fuel tank during take off, but these breakages were not considered to be too important, as they occured outside the "time window" of foam break off anticipated by NASA. If, for some reason, the Shuttle cannot safely return to Earth immediately, the astronauts can try to fix any damage using the machinery in the Shuttle, and, if this were to fail, the astronauts would be able to stay on the ISS for up to 80 days. In preparation for such an occurence, the SRB's and External tank for Atlantis are coupled inside the VAB; the Orbiter available for launch within 50 days.
-- If I clone myself, can I call it a thread?
If a girl winks to us, can I call it a race condition?
Re:Yeah, it was safe...
by
Helvick
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
And the rather large piece of debris spotted by the crew - possible piece of insulating blanket from the orbiter itself 5-6 feet long.
Re:Yeah, it was safe...
by
Chanc_Gorkon
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Which if you read your link was reported harmless....it was a piece of ice.
Until today, I thought trolling/crapflooding was the most pathetic form of internet nerdery. Today I have learned that failing at it is the true low point. I hope that the mysterious inner circle of reject friends gives you a lifetime ban from their secret club for being such a failure.
I gotta give NASA one thing...
by
Skyshadow
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Even given how outdated, expensive, failure-prone and downright dangerous the Space Shuttle is, they're still pretty goddamn sweet looking when they lift off.
I hope to Christ they get through these last few shuttle missions without a problem and manage to stick the remaining three in museums where they belong.
-- Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
This is great and all but
by
Kazzahdrane
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I wish space exploration was advancing faster. It seems sad that in this, the 21st century, the world's superpowers are still spending vast sums of money on killing other humans, instead of seeing what's beyond our own back yard. It's a really geeky thing to say I know, but I often wish I'd been born a few centuries later, and had the chance to live the Star Trek life. A lifetime of exploring space sounds great to me.
On a more serious note, I've often thought of manned deep space exploration as a bit of a Catch 22. I think it's the sort of thing that could really bring humanity together and encourage us to look past our differences and work together towards a common goal - but then I also think that we couldn't achieve a united deep space exploration programme until humanity learned to work together ans set aside our petty squabbles.
I'm holding out for a discovery of some kind that will shunt the human race into a new era of enlightenment, but I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.
I can only imagine the bad-taste jokes that would have happened if there has been an accident.
"Why doesn't NASA have 4th of July BBQs anymore?" "They can't convince any of the astronauts to show up."
"New from TNT Fireworks: The Discovery! The biggest bang for your bucks! Fits any space-exploration budget!"
MY PIECE OF S**T CAR
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Every time I go to the grocery store in my piece of **** car, to buy some beer and smokes, I too leave with a thunderous blast and cloud of smoke, rattling my own garage door for 5 minutes... and I'm guaranteed on every trip that at least 5 objects fall off my car as well.
In fact, everyone knows in my neighborhood I'm about to do a launnch, because I have to run an air compressor to pump up the bald back tires... they gather in lawn chairs to watch and kids on bicycles patrol the streets like F15's to make sure my air space is clear.
If I tune the radio just right I can pick up Rush Limbaugh, which is as close as I get to mission control.
Once it caught on fire, and darn near well exploded. I had to pop the hood right quick and jump on there and take a good p*** on the fuel rail which was on fire... took everything I got to put that one out. That was Grocery Trip number 13. I guess it was jinxed by the number. I hear Ron Howards planning on making a movie short about that trip. I had to patch up the fuel rail with some duck tape and used condoms I found behind the back seat.
You know, buck for buck, I believe the American public gets more drama and excitement out of my car then they do some old space shuttle. With the front end alignment being as shot out as it is, I know it gives me plenty of excitement on the turnpike, jumping all over as it does
Where's the kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth shattering kaboom!
Beautiful naked-eye sight
by
product+byproduct
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Since the shuttle is going to dock with the ISS, make sure you check on Heavens-Above for ISS and STS-121 sightings from your city in the next few days. The best time is just before they dock (or right after they separate) because then you see two small dots in the sky racing in close formation.
Is the demand really there?
by
vancondo
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
It would appear that the only people with the means to make suborbital space tourism a reality no longer have the motivation to do it as fast as possible.
Why do you suppose that is? Is that 'being first' was enough of a motivator to get to the point where the x-prize was claimed, but once you get into the nuts and bolts of going to the next step there just isn't the demand, or if there is the demand the economics just don't work out?
How much would you pay to go into space? Would you be able to afford it?
-- -
Re:"The mst complex machine ever built, blaah, bla
by
Skyshadow
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I'm not sure they're trying to say that it's a good thing in and of itself that the shuttle is complex, but rather to point out (rightly) that it's impressive that it works right on a fairly consistant basis.
I would be the last person to argue that the shuttle isn't overly complex. Because of the dueling priorities between NASA and the Pentagon during its design phases combined with the basic nature of design-by-committee, it ended up trying to do too many things. The shuttle is one of my favorite cautionary examples to bring up during requirements meetings because of this.
That aside, it's a serious mistake to take KISS too far -- this is something I see over and over again. Once you start diking complexity out of anything, it's always tempting to keep going even to the point where it starts impacting your actual goals (a fact which, in my experience, you won't realize until you go into testing, at which point you get to try and tack it back in at the expense of timelines, vast amounts of money and the jobs of easily-blamed underlings).
But I guess that's the value of experience.
-- Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
In an era in which a larger world can be frustrated by other actions of the United States, take some comfort in physicist Robert Wilson's testimony to Congress in 1969 to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, when he was asked to explain why the United States should fund a very expensive atom smasher. Wilson had already explained that the atom smasher wouldn't do much at all for the defense of the United States, but Wilson continued,
It has only to do with the respect with which we regard one another, the dignity of men, our love of culture. It has to do with: Are we good painters, good sculptors, great poets? I mean all the things we really venerate in our country and are patriotic about. It has nothing to do directly with defending our country except to make it worth defending.
There are seven people on board that rocket today, they are smarter than you or I, and harder working, and they have seen 14 others go to their deaths on the same craft.
So: let's all do something to make ourselves worth defending, okay?
Disappointed.....
by
Chanc_Gorkon
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Listen: SPACEFLIGHT IS DANGEROUS!!!! If you wait until everything is 100 percent safe, you will never leave the ground. I am glad someone at NASA had the balls to risk it. We have impotant work to do in space that will need humans. If we are ever to have colonies on the Mars or the Moon we have to risk it. It's just the same as Lewis and Clark, Christopher Columbus and John Cabot. If noone in Europe ever came here, none of us would be here to celebrate Independence Day. I am proud to be a American even if the American's on Slashdot aren't.
--
Gorkman
Re:Disappointed.....
by
adrianmonk
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
As a non-american, I'm just curious. What independence are you celebrating?
What is it that you gained independence from? Are you still independent of it today?
I'm just going to give this a straightforward answer. I think
there may be some anti-US subtext going on in your comment, but
it's so short I'm not going to read that into it, or tease it
out, as the case may be.
So, the answer is, the thing we are celebrating our independence
from, most specifically, is British rule. As someone else has
already pointed out, July 4, 1776 is the date of the public
announcement of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
(It was signed a few days before July 4th.)
A little less specifically, we are celebrating our independence
from colonial rule. This is something about a zillion other
countries do, on account of so many countries being former
colonies. You can count India, Australia, 90+% of the
countries in Africa,
90+% of the countries in South America, and several other
countries as members of the club of former colonies.
More philsophically, the US is
celebrating its independence from monarchy, and not
just monarchy specifically, but all forms of arbitrary,
non-representative government in general. The government
of the US is explicitly a contract between the people and
the state. The state's power is justified because the
people have given it the power, rather than (say) divine
right or tradition. There are term limits on most offices,
regular elections, and just about any regular person can
stand for office: there is no need to be royalty or to be
a member of a ruling class. Indeed, the US Constitution
explicity forbids the granting of any "title of nobility".
Whether all this idealistic stuff really represents the
way things work in reality is another question. A decent
argument can be made that the US declared independence
because it didn't want to pay taxes to Britain back home
and it
thought it could get away with it. That a constitutional
government was set up afterwards might not have been the
main point, although it was a good thing. In fact, it
wasn't until after the Revolution was sucessful and we
were independent that it was even determined what independence
would mean and what we had fought for. The US Constitution
wasn't even ratified until after the Articles of Confederation
failed. In a sense, we are United States 2.0, because United
States 1.0 was a failure after about a decade. And even after
the Constitution was put in place, it took a few decades before
we really had decided how the country was going to operate.
One could argue that our national identity wasn't really
defined until Jefferson's presidency, which started a full 25
years after the Declaration of Independence.
So basically, we are celebrating independence from Britain,
independence from colonialism, and independence from arbitrary,
non-respresentative rule. We are still independent of all
three of these things, mostly. In fact, most of the rest of
the world is free of them now, too. There are still some
monarchies in the world, but most of them (such as Britain)
are in name only. Liberalism and democracy are virtually
the norm in governments these days.
Re:Disappointed.....
by
Moraelin
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
1. About tyranny, monarchy and non-representative rule: While they do make for some emotional arguments, let's remember that England was a parliamentary monarchy at the time. Maybe not in the same sense of the word as today, but let's remember that that parliament _did_ repel some taxes (e.g., the stamp act) when the colonists protested them. So how much more representation _do_ you want, if even being able to repel laws and taxes isn't enough for you?
2. Comparing it to India is pretty much bullshit, since India was under foreign occupation. The american colonies were British citizens, no less favoured than those in the UK.
3. Taxes. Ah-ha. Now we're getting somewhere. I hope you do, however, understand that an average citizen in the colonies paid insignifficant taxes compared to the citizens back home in the UK. As in, IIRC somewhere between 20 to 30 times less per capita. It also didn't help that the colonists threatened any tax collectors with tarring and feathering.
A lot of the special tax acts, e.g., the stamp act, weren't just to fleece the colonists, but because they paid almost nothing else. So the UK government just tried to figure out ways to keep it fair. Ok, so you don't want to pay other taxes, but, seriously, you're not _that_ special to pay nothing whatsoever. How about you pay this other tax instead, if the old one isn't to your liking?
The Boston Tea Party? Let's remember that that wasn't about some new tax, but about elliminating a tax. Smugglers like John Hancock were making a small fortune by smuggling tea into the USA without paying customs, and thus being able to undercut the prices of the East India Company. So when the British government allowed the East India Company to stop paying that tax too, oh looky, the smugglers were outraged at losing their own unfair advantage.
So exactly what oppressive taxation are we talking about? If paying 20-30 times less taxes than a mainland British citizen was too oppressive, exactly how much tax would be OK for their liking? Zero? Are you still paying that much?
Tyranny and taxation without representation? Heh. Try doing the same today in your land of the free, and see if you'd get away with that. No, seriously. Get your own village (most colonies were about that size) suddenly saying that you don't want to pay taxes any more and threatening violence against the IRS. Or deciding that you can stop paying customs taxes. See how long it would take for your representative and democratic government's men to show up on your doorsteps with flak vests and M16's.
-- A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
NASA's MP4 video file of the space shuttle launch!
by
antdude
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Click here to download the 16.3 MB MP4 video file. It is about 3 minutes and 22 seconds long. Awesome stuff.
-- Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Re:The most complex machine?
by
jc42
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Some time last year, I saw the same claim made for Windows Vista.
Of course, since then, they've cut back on major new features. So maybe now it isn't the most complex thing that humans have ever built.
But there are many ways to define complexity. Someone at MS (or one of their detractors) is probably right now working on a definition that will restore the claim.
-- Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
I was at Epcot when the shuttle launched. I had just gotten out of Mission Space and noticed that everyone was looking to the sky. Then I remembered that the shuttle was about to launch.
And sure enough, about 30 seconds later, it came into view. You could see the shuttle, the fire from the rockets and the thick column of smoke, right over the Mission Space building. The entire theme park was at a stand still looking at the spectacle. Some people cried, most clapped. It was a great moment.
was actually two large coolers full of ice-cold PBR left over from the festivities.
-- [http://it-tastes-so-good.blogspot.com]
Are you hungry?
Re:The most complex machine?
by
Sathias
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Lets just hope that chunks of Aero Glass foam don't tear off it during the product launch.
-- Blessed are the 1337, for they shall pwn the earth.
Time for a replacement.
by
ke4roh
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
It took Columbia's dissentigration to convince me, but Alex Roland is right. The Shuttle is a jobs program with a little bit of scientific research thrown in for fun. It's far more expensive than it was designed to be, and it's proven itself not viable time and again. The only people who aren't taking note are those who write the checks.
What should we be doing in space? We should be using robots to explore (like the Mars rovers) and perform experiments in orbit. We should send people when we get the fuel to vehicle mass ratio better than 97%, and when it can warrant the expense of taking life support systems on a mission.
The Moon/Mars trips are another bigger jobs program, but they don't even have to get anywhere because the guy who called for them (and his successor, for that matter) will be safely out of office before the promised arrival date of 2018, so when it falls short, he won't have a price to pay.
If Mars is the goal, the Mars Direct plan is much more economical. If the Moon is the target, go straight there, but don't use the Moon as a lillypad to get to Mars because landing and launching from there takes a certain amount of energy that needs not be expended on the way to Mars.
I want to see us (humans) explore space. I want to learn about the cosmos and I'd love to leave the planet (and probably return). I've followed the U.S. space program since I was old enough to know what a rocket was, and I've learned about the Soviet program since Glasnost. Now I'd like to see us do something meaningful - not just run a space truck to orbit and back, and not just design a fantastical Moon/Mars mission for the sake of it, but really learn about better forms of transportation and about the universe.
Bartering demands a lower standard of living
by
ScentCone
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Money is a form of control developed by the powerful. The barter system would transfer power semi-randomly, and those who hunger for power cannot allow that.
Look, someday when you've turned 13 or 14, you'll realize how ridiculous you sound. "Money," meaning, a token that represents the value of something else (like a sack of flour, or an hour of your labor), isn't a form of control - it's a form of liberty. If you had to rely on the physical movement of bartered goods from one barterer to another, or could only barter your services with people that happened to have in hand just thing you neeeded that day (broccoli? some new refridgerant?), you'd get very, very little done and have very few choices.
But wait: I can hear it now... you say: but what about some global version of Craig's List, or some other online way to arrange bartering, so that no one needs evil money? Um... OK, so how do you advetise what you're willing to barter? Say you've got a dozen eggs, and you need everything from some antibiotics for a sick child, new toothpaste, some lumber for your collapsing roof, and a thousand other things. What do you do... list all of the things (and quantities of those things) you're willing to exchange for eggs? Ah... you're setting a price. Now, you've got a thousand other people all doing the same thing... a gigantic, inefficient bartering matrix that requires constant fiddling to see if you can get what you want, and whether it's available for a barter you can make. And, while you're spending all that time trying to get the best barter for your eggs, you could have been better doing what you're good at, and improving your egg production in the first place.
And then, what if you know you'll find such a barter a week from now, but your eggs are only valuable while they're fresh? What do you do, barter them for something else that looks valuable, just to hold the value in your hand while you look around for a good trade on the other things you need? If so, the interim thing you're holding is just a token representing the value of the eggs. What is it, a car battery? Some firewood? A basket of turnips? Here's an idea: how about we get together as a society, and provide everyone a vastly better standard of living by removing the third-world marketplace components of all of that, and use currency instead. Oh, right - we already do that.
And it allows you to do work when and as you can, and then get the goods and services when and as you need them... later. That frees you from the tyranny of proximity, and frees you from worrying about who controls your timing, when it comes to certain trades/barters. And with currency, you can pool your resources to do long-term things like build pharamceutical labs and factories so that you can actually have the antibiotics you need for a sick child... when you need them, not just when you happen to have eggs at the same time that someone with antibiotics happens to want an omlet.
A group of these smart people developed money.
No, a group of these smart people realized they were wasting their lives carrying their value around on their backs and haggling in vegetable markets all day, just so they could swap out what they produce when they're not busy looking for someone to barter with. Money is super-flexible, time-shifted bartering at distance, and if you can't see that, no wonder you're unhappy.
It's so scary cuz it's no longer the group of smart men, it's became an idea.
You want scary? Go back to standing around with a basket of eggs and wondering how you'll get what you need if no one in the vicinity happens to need your eggs that day. Or having some other need on a week when you don't happen to have any eggs to trade. Currency and a banking system take the capriciousness out of it, and reduce fear. You've got it backwards.
-- Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
It must be a slow slashdot news day. NASA Shuttle has launched hundreds of times before safely.
It's still more of a news story than Dork-vorak's latest opinion on any random subject or an article about "Is [insert the name of a lame duck technology] dead/obsolete?". How many "news stories" did we have to endure about Bluetooth being a dead technology only to mill through waste-deep comments from pizza delivery boys who talked up how bitchin' their bluetooth mouse is. Not to say that the opinion of a pizza delivery boy isn't just as legitimate as Dvorak's...
-- Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
Richard Feynman's Paper on the Challenger Disaster
by
bcnstony
·
· Score: 5, Informative
For those who haven't read it, Richard Feynman's Personal observations on
the reliability of the Shuttle is a fascinating look at some of NASA's inner workings, and the problems that led to the challenger disaster. What is suprising (or perhaps totally expected) is that once again we hear managers and engineers differ on what is acceptable levels of risk.
For those who don't know Richard Feynman, he won the Nobel prize, helped develop the atom bomb, and suggested ways for geeks to pick up women.
It is so inspiring to see that shuttle blast into orbit. Such a technological achievement, such an affirmation of the power and beauty science has brought to us.
And yet, here alongside these feelings of grandeur in my heart are these off-putting notions of what the shuttle actually means. How, even though it's one of the most amazing creations in the history of mankind, it represents so many of our failings.
The cost of a shuttle launch, while great, is dwarfed by the day-to-day costs of modern wars.
The shuttle, while technologically impressive, is still very much a cut-back version of what it was intended to be.
If you have the time I recommend watching and listening to Rutan's adress to the National Space Society.
Rutan makes many points to ponder - which highlight questions I myself have wondered. For instance, why can't I fly to space yet? Why is it so hard?
Burt Rutan makes the observation that when he saw the Redstone rocket at the national air museum he wondered, "why don't we fly this anymore?".
Indeed why! It's cheap, it's simple - simpler can and often does mean safer. The Redstone can get a person or two into orbit. And why not launch a couple a week? Burt Rutan goes on to point out that after each new space vehicle is created the old designs are never used again.
He states that if we followed this philosophy with aircraft we would have only one airplane flying right now, the B2 bomber!
I don't mean to be a naysayer on this great launch day. I don't mean to steal thunder from such a remarkable achievement (and few are greater fans of the space shuttle than myself). But I think there is a problem with NASA's philosophy of what space exploration is - what it means to the average person.
For me, space exploration means the exploration of space. And I want to be the explorer.
As far as I know, NASA doesn't have me slated for any launches in the foreseeable future.
My Computer Music Tutorial Videos
Godspeed, Discovery, and come home safe!
I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
Still trying to drum up some backing.... Since when is complexity a good thing? The space shuttle is really far more complex than it needs to be and is far less reliable than it needs to be to do a proper job. While this complex machine falls part, Russian "pickup truck"-style space vehicles just get on with the job with little fanfare.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Granted, a launch is the controlled ignition of the largest bottle rocket ever made, and that's dangerous. But isn't the primary concern these days the foam breaking off of the fuel tank and damaging heat tiles, which don't matter until re-entry? Post again when it's touched down on earth safely, please.
Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
Lets hope the LANDING goes just as well.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
It's successful when it lands and the astronauts step back onto terra firma. Especially, as other comenters have already mentioned, given how swimmingly the last Columbia mission was going until the last few minutes.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
watched it live from my front yard in Titusville - the wind was perfect and it was the loudest launch I have heard in a long time - my garage door was rattling for a good 5 or 6 minutes - perfect launch for the 4th of July !!
Yeah, it was a safe take-off. Apart from the 5 objects that fell off during the launch.
Get your own free personal location tracker
Until today, I thought trolling/crapflooding was the most pathetic form of internet nerdery. Today I have learned that failing at it is the true low point. I hope that the mysterious inner circle of reject friends gives you a lifetime ban from their secret club for being such a failure.
I hope to Christ they get through these last few shuttle missions without a problem and manage to stick the remaining three in museums where they belong.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
I wish space exploration was advancing faster. It seems sad that in this, the 21st century, the world's superpowers are still spending vast sums of money on killing other humans, instead of seeing what's beyond our own back yard. It's a really geeky thing to say I know, but I often wish I'd been born a few centuries later, and had the chance to live the Star Trek life. A lifetime of exploring space sounds great to me.
On a more serious note, I've often thought of manned deep space exploration as a bit of a Catch 22. I think it's the sort of thing that could really bring humanity together and encourage us to look past our differences and work together towards a common goal - but then I also think that we couldn't achieve a united deep space exploration programme until humanity learned to work together ans set aside our petty squabbles.
I'm holding out for a discovery of some kind that will shunt the human race into a new era of enlightenment, but I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.
I can only imagine the bad-taste jokes that would have happened if there has been an accident.
"Why doesn't NASA have 4th of July BBQs anymore?"
"They can't convince any of the astronauts to show up."
"New from TNT Fireworks: The Discovery! The biggest bang for your bucks! Fits any space-exploration budget!"
Every time I go to the grocery store in my piece of **** car, to buy some beer and smokes, I too leave with a thunderous blast and cloud of smoke, rattling my own garage door for 5 minutes... and I'm guaranteed on every trip that at least 5 objects fall off my car as well.
In fact, everyone knows in my neighborhood I'm about to do a launnch, because I have to run an air compressor to pump up the bald back tires... they gather in lawn chairs to watch and kids on bicycles patrol the streets like F15's to make sure my air space is clear.
If I tune the radio just right I can pick up Rush Limbaugh, which is as close as I get to mission control.
Once it caught on fire, and darn near well exploded. I had to pop the hood right quick and jump on there and take a good p*** on the fuel rail which was on fire... took everything I got to put that one out. That was Grocery Trip number 13. I guess it was jinxed by the number. I hear Ron Howards planning on making a movie short about that trip. I had to patch up the fuel rail with some duck tape and used condoms I found behind the back seat.
You know, buck for buck, I believe the American public gets more drama and excitement out of my car then they do some old space shuttle. With the front end alignment being as shot out as it is, I know it gives me plenty of excitement on the turnpike, jumping all over as it does
Where's the kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth shattering kaboom!
Since the shuttle is going to dock with the ISS, make sure you check on Heavens-Above for ISS and STS-121 sightings from your city in the next few days. The best time is just before they dock (or right after they separate) because then you see two small dots in the sky racing in close formation.
Why do you suppose that is? Is that 'being first' was enough of a motivator to get to the point where the x-prize was claimed, but once you get into the nuts and bolts of going to the next step there just isn't the demand, or if there is the demand the economics just don't work out?
How much would you pay to go into space? Would you be able to afford it?
-
I'm not sure they're trying to say that it's a good thing in and of itself that the shuttle is complex, but rather to point out (rightly) that it's impressive that it works right on a fairly consistant basis.
I would be the last person to argue that the shuttle isn't overly complex. Because of the dueling priorities between NASA and the Pentagon during its design phases combined with the basic nature of design-by-committee, it ended up trying to do too many things. The shuttle is one of my favorite cautionary examples to bring up during requirements meetings because of this.
That aside, it's a serious mistake to take KISS too far -- this is something I see over and over again. Once you start diking complexity out of anything, it's always tempting to keep going even to the point where it starts impacting your actual goals (a fact which, in my experience, you won't realize until you go into testing, at which point you get to try and tack it back in at the expense of timelines, vast amounts of money and the jobs of easily-blamed underlings).
But I guess that's the value of experience.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
There are seven people on board that rocket today, they are smarter than you or I, and harder working, and they have seen 14 others go to their deaths on the same craft.
So: let's all do something to make ourselves worth defending, okay?
Listen: SPACEFLIGHT IS DANGEROUS!!!! If you wait until everything is 100 percent safe, you will never leave the ground. I am glad someone at NASA had the balls to risk it. We have impotant work to do in space that will need humans. If we are ever to have colonies on the Mars or the Moon we have to risk it. It's just the same as Lewis and Clark, Christopher Columbus and John Cabot. If noone in Europe ever came here, none of us would be here to celebrate Independence Day. I am proud to be a American even if the American's on Slashdot aren't.
Gorkman
Click here to download the 16.3 MB MP4 video file. It is about 3 minutes and 22 seconds long. Awesome stuff.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Some time last year, I saw the same claim made for Windows Vista.
Of course, since then, they've cut back on major new features. So maybe now it isn't the most complex thing that humans have ever built.
But there are many ways to define complexity. Someone at MS (or one of their detractors) is probably right now working on a definition that will restore the claim.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
I was at Epcot when the shuttle launched. I had just gotten out of Mission Space and noticed that everyone was looking to the sky. Then I remembered that the shuttle was about to launch.
And sure enough, about 30 seconds later, it came into view. You could see the shuttle, the fire from the rockets and the thick column of smoke, right over the Mission Space building. The entire theme park was at a stand still looking at the spectacle. Some people cried, most clapped. It was a great moment.
was actually two large coolers full of ice-cold PBR left over from the festivities.
[http://it-tastes-so-good.blogspot.com] Are you hungry?
Lets just hope that chunks of Aero Glass foam don't tear off it during the product launch.
Blessed are the 1337, for they shall pwn the earth.
It took Columbia's dissentigration to convince me, but Alex Roland is right. The Shuttle is a jobs program with a little bit of scientific research thrown in for fun. It's far more expensive than it was designed to be, and it's proven itself not viable time and again. The only people who aren't taking note are those who write the checks.
Fred DeJarnette, who worked on the original tile engineering is ready for a replacement. Let's do some real engineering and come up with a better spacecraft! (The Onion has an interesting take on the Shuttle program.)
What should we be doing in space? We should be using robots to explore (like the Mars rovers) and perform experiments in orbit. We should send people when we get the fuel to vehicle mass ratio better than 97%, and when it can warrant the expense of taking life support systems on a mission.
The Moon/Mars trips are another bigger jobs program, but they don't even have to get anywhere because the guy who called for them (and his successor, for that matter) will be safely out of office before the promised arrival date of 2018, so when it falls short, he won't have a
price to pay.
If Mars is the goal, the Mars Direct plan is much more economical. If the Moon is the target, go straight there, but don't use the Moon as a lillypad to get to Mars because landing and launching from there takes a certain amount of energy that needs not be expended on the way to Mars.
I want to see us (humans) explore space. I want to learn about the cosmos and I'd love to leave the planet (and probably return). I've followed the U.S. space program since I was old enough to know what a rocket was, and I've learned about the Soviet program since Glasnost. Now I'd like to see us do something meaningful - not just run a space truck to orbit and back, and not just design a fantastical Moon/Mars mission for the sake of it, but really learn about better forms of transportation and about the universe.
I hate call waitin`~+~~~
NO CARRIER
Money is a form of control developed by the powerful. The barter system would transfer power semi-randomly, and those who hunger for power cannot allow that.
... later. That frees you from the tyranny of proximity, and frees you from worrying about who controls your timing, when it comes to certain trades/barters. And with currency, you can pool your resources to do long-term things like build pharamceutical labs and factories so that you can actually have the antibiotics you need for a sick child... when you need them, not just when you happen to have eggs at the same time that someone with antibiotics happens to want an omlet.
Look, someday when you've turned 13 or 14, you'll realize how ridiculous you sound. "Money," meaning, a token that represents the value of something else (like a sack of flour, or an hour of your labor), isn't a form of control - it's a form of liberty. If you had to rely on the physical movement of bartered goods from one barterer to another, or could only barter your services with people that happened to have in hand just thing you neeeded that day (broccoli? some new refridgerant?), you'd get very, very little done and have very few choices.
But wait: I can hear it now... you say: but what about some global version of Craig's List, or some other online way to arrange bartering, so that no one needs evil money? Um... OK, so how do you advetise what you're willing to barter? Say you've got a dozen eggs, and you need everything from some antibiotics for a sick child, new toothpaste, some lumber for your collapsing roof, and a thousand other things. What do you do... list all of the things (and quantities of those things) you're willing to exchange for eggs? Ah... you're setting a price. Now, you've got a thousand other people all doing the same thing... a gigantic, inefficient bartering matrix that requires constant fiddling to see if you can get what you want, and whether it's available for a barter you can make. And, while you're spending all that time trying to get the best barter for your eggs, you could have been better doing what you're good at, and improving your egg production in the first place.
And then, what if you know you'll find such a barter a week from now, but your eggs are only valuable while they're fresh? What do you do, barter them for something else that looks valuable, just to hold the value in your hand while you look around for a good trade on the other things you need? If so, the interim thing you're holding is just a token representing the value of the eggs. What is it, a car battery? Some firewood? A basket of turnips? Here's an idea: how about we get together as a society, and provide everyone a vastly better standard of living by removing the third-world marketplace components of all of that, and use currency instead. Oh, right - we already do that.
And it allows you to do work when and as you can, and then get the goods and services when and as you need them
A group of these smart people developed money.
No, a group of these smart people realized they were wasting their lives carrying their value around on their backs and haggling in vegetable markets all day, just so they could swap out what they produce when they're not busy looking for someone to barter with. Money is super-flexible, time-shifted bartering at distance, and if you can't see that, no wonder you're unhappy.
It's so scary cuz it's no longer the group of smart men, it's became an idea.
You want scary? Go back to standing around with a basket of eggs and wondering how you'll get what you need if no one in the vicinity happens to need your eggs that day. Or having some other need on a week when you don't happen to have any eggs to trade. Currency and a banking system take the capriciousness out of it, and reduce fear. You've got it backwards.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
It must be a slow slashdot news day. NASA Shuttle has launched hundreds of times before safely.
It's still more of a news story than Dork-vorak's latest opinion on any random subject or an article about "Is [insert the name of a lame duck technology] dead/obsolete?". How many "news stories" did we have to endure about Bluetooth being a dead technology only to mill through waste-deep comments from pizza delivery boys who talked up how bitchin' their bluetooth mouse is. Not to say that the opinion of a pizza delivery boy isn't just as legitimate as Dvorak's...
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
For those who haven't read it, Richard Feynman's Personal observations on the reliability of the Shuttle is a fascinating look at some of NASA's inner workings, and the problems that led to the challenger disaster. What is suprising (or perhaps totally expected) is that once again we hear managers and engineers differ on what is acceptable levels of risk.
For those who don't know Richard Feynman, he won the Nobel prize, helped develop the atom bomb, and suggested ways for geeks to pick up women.