t'll mean a couple more transporter flights (and someone will have to pay for those of course) but the ISS can survive without any Shuttle flights at all without any problems.
Then why were there such problems during the post Columbia stand down? (Hint: It's because the Shuttle provides the majority of cargo upmass and a significant amount of reboost capacity.)
If they're going to decommission a shuttle, why not leave it at the station?
Because it will die twenty odd days after docking if used as redundant facilities, forty odd days if nearly completely powered down. Even if ISS could power Shuttle (which it currently cannot), the Shuttle uses canisters to scrub CO2 from the atmosphere rather than a molecular sieve. (And ventilation hoses cannot be run through the hatches for safety reasons.)
There's more problems than those, but those are the biggies.
Isn't there a fourth option? Namely- use Soyuz to transport people from now on
Without Shuttle to provide the cargo upmass and reboosts - there isn't a fourth option. Soyuz and Progress can't do it, ATV won't fly often enough, and HTV is still largely in the vaporware category (and even if it was flying, wouldn't add sufficient performance).
Gas stations have to put a certain amount in escrow to allow for digging up the storage vessels and decontaminating. Why don't nuclear reactors have to set aside the money before they're even allowed to build?
Probably because back when they built 'em, decommissioning wasn't an issue.
He could be working for any number of companies that operate power reactors. Or for any number of places that operate research reactors. Or for any number of consultants and analysts on the maintenance/modification of those reactors. Or for the companies that design, build, or do research on the design and construction, of those reactors. ("None being built in the US" != "none being built anywhere".)
Then there is the DoE, in it's regulatory or research branches. NASA does reactor research as well. (And other branches are involved too... The EPA for just one example.)
Then there's the biggie... The Navy's nuclear power program. Between the sub base, the naval shipyard, and the supporting contractors, there's probably a thousand or more within a few miles of me.
The demand isn't large, but there's a lot more to the field than decommissioning existing reactors.
Beluga Fraternity? My Russian is so rusty I might just be typing the measurements of the playmate of the month, but wouldn't that portmanteau mean "White Brotherhood"? They've gotta mean something other that that, right?
Other than Beluga being an Arctic whale and a type of sturgeon, both with obvious connections to Russia and the Arctic? Or referring to Belarus and the White Russians.
Actually, a simple Google search reveals that it belongs to a shipping company named the Beluga Group, all of whose ships are named "Beluga _______. Odds are the name means nothing in particular.
Showing that you, like many other here on/. mistakenly think of Google as only a search company - rather than considering how Google is an also-ran in many of the areas that Microsoft and Yahoo! dominate in. There's more to the web than search.
Ah yes, despite evidence the research and trials are actually taking place - it's impossible for them to actually be taking place because no drug company will fund it.
Raymond Bradbury wrote about this in his seminal work Farenheit 451. Once we start allowing the minority to exert power over the majority in the name of fairness and protection, we lose a critical pillar of our society. Censorship is the first step, but later it will be outright censure.
The interesting part is that you assume the South is the minority exerting power - when it can be easily argued that it is 4chan who is the minority exerting power. Look at what they did the Time top 100 list.
We can talk about freedom of speech and such, but/b/ is home to content that is occasionally over the line illegal. On the other hand, only those who would actually seek it out would even know about it
Kinda like the meth lab/crackhouse that used to be a few blocks over. It was on a cul-de-sac in a poor neighborhood that only those who sought such things would even know about. I suspect that's little comfort to the family who's daughter was killed in another part of town by one who did seek it out. In the physical world and the virtual world, the effects of a place can reach far beyond that place.
Mind you, I'm not suggesting 4chan should be censored, only that your arguments are logically suspect.
On a wider note, unrelated to the parent, I note that the denizens of 4chan (or at least some of them) wasted no time in finding out what was going on and leapt immediately to suggesting harassing AT&T and outright criminal acts (cutting fiber).
It's not an insult - it's a statement of fact. You are not only utterly deluded about the facts of the matter - you don't care what facts are.
He's not building energy infrastructure, he's building just enough wind power to justify a land grab. He not building water infrastructure, he's raping an irreplaceable aquifer that feeds farmland so rich folks in the city can feed their lawns.
But you've deluded yourself into thinking that facade is good enough. Let him rape and steal and enrich himself at the taxpayers expense, just so long as he maintains that facade.
It's also far easier to build than any nuclear device.
However, 'easier to build than a nuclear device' != 'easy to build'. Like nuclear weapons, EMP bombs are simple in conception - not so simple in engineering.
Ya, he stood to make some serious dollars on the deal, but so effin what??
The problem is he stood to make serious dollars by fleecing the taxpayer - getting the government to underwrite his wind farms so he could lay claim to right-of-way for his power lines via eminent domain, and then use that right-of-way to move water. Shady at best, outright theft at worst.
I give the dude props, he has a logical and well thought out long view
That's the public image he's carefully cultivated. The truth is he's a shady bastard out to make megabucks for himself out of the taxpayers pocket, 'helping' the environment with wind power with one hand, while raping the slow to replenish aquifers.
The missions were cancelled after we had completed what you call NASA's "ultimate goal" twice.
Yep, as soon as the next budget cycle rolled around.
Your arguments that they had already paid for the equipment for the subsequent missions is incorrect, since they had paid for the equipment for all 20 missions
My logic that they had paid for the hardware for all twenty missions in incorrect... because they had already paid for the hardware for all twenty missions? Either your logic, writing, or editing skills are sadly lacking along with your knowledge. (Not all of Apollo 20's hardware was scrapped either - the Saturn V became Skylab and it's booster.)
At any rate, just buying the hardware is only the beginning of the outlay - because there are all the operational costs to follow.
Besides, your orginal argument "That Apollo's mission was written by the legislature" is bogus to begin with.
The goals of the individual missions of each Apollo spacecraft were written by NASA to meet the goals required to execute the mission for the Apollo Project as laid down by the Administration and Congress. Mission here is used in two different senses, don't confuse them. (Though I'm not surprised you do.)
Had I mentioned lightning - you'd have a point. Had anyone parent, grandparent, great grandparent, mentioned lightning... you'd have a point. But nobody mentioned lightning.
Go study the history of dirigible and blimps and see the many an varied conditions (other than lightning) under which they were lost.
Yeah, right. Everybody knew in 1962-63 (when the equipment was ordered), in 64-65 (when the mission was funded), and in 67-68 (when the mission was planned), that Apollo 11 would be a success. Here's a clue for you - look up when the final three Apollo missions were cut.
Actually - the handling and storage of the codes at the transmitting end, while unclassified, is not commonly known because the TV shows that ignorant assholes like you get their information from never show them - only the receiving end. (And the storage at the receiving end is only incompletely described.) Ditto for the fact that there are separate codes for launches, tests, and training.
Etc... Etc...
Trust me, having worked with the systems for a decade, I know full well what it common knowledge and what it not.
Slashdot Mirror
Then why were there such problems during the post Columbia stand down? (Hint: It's because the Shuttle provides the majority of cargo upmass and a significant amount of reboost capacity.)
Absolute maximum power down still only buys you (IIRC) fifty to sixty days before the Shuttle dies.
Because it will die twenty odd days after docking if used as redundant facilities, forty odd days if nearly completely powered down. Even if ISS could power Shuttle (which it currently cannot), the Shuttle uses canisters to scrub CO2 from the atmosphere rather than a molecular sieve. (And ventilation hoses cannot be run through the hatches for safety reasons.)
There's more problems than those, but those are the biggies.
Without Shuttle to provide the cargo upmass and reboosts - there isn't a fourth option. Soyuz and Progress can't do it, ATV won't fly often enough, and HTV is still largely in the vaporware category (and even if it was flying, wouldn't add sufficient performance).
Probably because back when they built 'em, decommissioning wasn't an issue.
He could be working for any number of companies that operate power reactors. Or for any number of places that operate research reactors. Or for any number of consultants and analysts on the maintenance/modification of those reactors. Or for the companies that design, build, or do research on the design and construction, of those reactors. ("None being built in the US" != "none being built anywhere".)
Then there is the DoE, in it's regulatory or research branches. NASA does reactor research as well. (And other branches are involved too... The EPA for just one example.)
Then there's the biggie... The Navy's nuclear power program. Between the sub base, the naval shipyard, and the supporting contractors, there's probably a thousand or more within a few miles of me.
The demand isn't large, but there's a lot more to the field than decommissioning existing reactors.
Other than Beluga being an Arctic whale and a type of sturgeon, both with obvious connections to Russia and the Arctic? Or referring to Belarus and the White Russians.
Actually, a simple Google search reveals that it belongs to a shipping company named the Beluga Group, all of whose ships are named "Beluga _______. Odds are the name means nothing in particular.
Showing that you, like many other here on /. mistakenly think of Google as only a search company - rather than considering how Google is an also-ran in many of the areas that Microsoft and Yahoo! dominate in. There's more to the web than search.
Insightful? In what way? All I see is a bunch of Microsoft and Ballmer bashing with little in the way of content or commentary.
I don't think many people today are capable of feeling shame or embarrassment.
Ah yes, despite evidence the research and trials are actually taking place - it's impossible for them to actually be taking place because no drug company will fund it.
Take your tinfoil hat bullshit elsewhere.
The interesting part is that you assume the South is the minority exerting power - when it can be easily argued that it is 4chan who is the minority exerting power. Look at what they did the Time top 100 list.
Kinda like the meth lab/crackhouse that used to be a few blocks over. It was on a cul-de-sac in a poor neighborhood that only those who sought such things would even know about. I suspect that's little comfort to the family who's daughter was killed in another part of town by one who did seek it out. In the physical world and the virtual world, the effects of a place can reach far beyond that place.
Mind you, I'm not suggesting 4chan should be censored, only that your arguments are logically suspect.
On a wider note, unrelated to the parent, I note that the denizens of 4chan (or at least some of them) wasted no time in finding out what was going on and leapt immediately to suggesting harassing AT&T and outright criminal acts (cutting fiber).
Nobody ever claimed the /b/tards were smart. Clever, created, talent, energetic - sure. But not smart.
It's not an insult - it's a statement of fact. You are not only utterly deluded about the facts of the matter - you don't care what facts are.
He's not building energy infrastructure, he's building just enough wind power to justify a land grab. He not building water infrastructure, he's raping an irreplaceable aquifer that feeds farmland so rich folks in the city can feed their lawns.
But you've deluded yourself into thinking that facade is good enough. Let him rape and steal and enrich himself at the taxpayers expense, just so long as he maintains that facade.
Could you try posting in English? Or at least while sober?
However, 'easier to build than a nuclear device' != 'easy to build'. Like nuclear weapons, EMP bombs are simple in conception - not so simple in engineering.
The problem is he stood to make serious dollars by fleecing the taxpayer - getting the government to underwrite his wind farms so he could lay claim to right-of-way for his power lines via eminent domain, and then use that right-of-way to move water. Shady at best, outright theft at worst.
That's the public image he's carefully cultivated. The truth is he's a shady bastard out to make megabucks for himself out of the taxpayers pocket, 'helping' the environment with wind power with one hand, while raping the slow to replenish aquifers.
Yep, as soon as the next budget cycle rolled around.
My logic that they had paid for the hardware for all twenty missions in incorrect... because they had already paid for the hardware for all twenty missions? Either your logic, writing, or editing skills are sadly lacking along with your knowledge. (Not all of Apollo 20's hardware was scrapped either - the Saturn V became Skylab and it's booster.)
At any rate, just buying the hardware is only the beginning of the outlay - because there are all the operational costs to follow.
The goals of the individual missions of each Apollo spacecraft were written by NASA to meet the goals required to execute the mission for the Apollo Project as laid down by the Administration and Congress. Mission here is used in two different senses, don't confuse them. (Though I'm not surprised you do.)
Had I mentioned lightning - you'd have a point. Had anyone parent, grandparent, great grandparent, mentioned lightning... you'd have a point. But nobody mentioned lightning.
Go study the history of dirigible and blimps and see the many an varied conditions (other than lightning) under which they were lost.
It's possible to prove anything when you cherry pick - and that you had to cherry pick to prove your point, that says much.
Yeah, right. Everybody knew in 1962-63 (when the equipment was ordered), in 64-65 (when the mission was funded), and in 67-68 (when the mission was planned), that Apollo 11 would be a success. Here's a clue for you - look up when the final three Apollo missions were cut.
This from the guy who started the whole process by attacking me?
If that were true, you'd know what I wrote wasn't "common knowledge".
Since it's not free to replicate, I quit reading - because the rest of your comment is obviously bullshit.
Doesn't matter which sense you use it in - Apollo was never intended to build a moon base except in NASA's fevered hopes and dreams.
Actually - the handling and storage of the codes at the transmitting end, while unclassified, is not commonly known because the TV shows that ignorant assholes like you get their information from never show them - only the receiving end. (And the storage at the receiving end is only incompletely described.) Ditto for the fact that there are separate codes for launches, tests, and training.
Etc... Etc...
Trust me, having worked with the systems for a decade, I know full well what it common knowledge and what it not.