--Sure they can. Many of pre-ESAS plans for lunar exploration used the Atlas V or Delta IV rockets.--
Doubtful, when you add everything up, but I guess they could send more than one just like Ares.
--First, this isn't the case -- Aerojet builds solid rockets for the Atlas V. More importantly, you seem to be under the strange assumption that solid rockets are necessary for a manned system, when the evidence seems to indicate that (when compared to liquid propellant) they actually result in a considerably more dangerous launch environment for crew.--
OK, Aerojet does in fact build those little boosters. So OK within a given budget, how would you do it? And why exactly would solid rockets be any more or less dangerous? I think if you compare the shuttle launches against the Soyuz launches, that the failure rate is just about the same although the shuttle did have more loss of life but only one of those accidents was caused by SRB failure. I think this is a myth as I know of only one failure in manned mission relating to this. So you have pointed out a much smaller player in SRB design that I wasn't aware of. I doesn't change much IMO.
I just don't think it is the track record of NASA that I would question as much as the track record of the rule makers (Congress, and the President).
I'm not assuming anything, I just think that solid rockets make the most sense at least for the first few stages. The Trident, Minuteman III, SRB's and many others are already proven, but whatever they use has to be man rated, so NASA would have to test either way, because I don't think the Delta's or Atlas V are man rated either, still it might be a little cheaper to go that route.
With all of the mergers, what other company cold deliver a working booster beside Thiokol? The Atlas or Deltas will not take you to the moon.
--NASA works a lot better when its overseeing the design and development work of private companies than when it's trying to act as an overseer for itself.--
I agree but what choice do they have now in contractors actually capable of fulfilling the contracts? Back in the 60's there might have been 4 or 5 companies that would be able to bid. Now you have 2 with only 1 have any real chance.
As far as I know ATK is the only company really building solid rockets right now. Even the strap on boosters for the other programs are made by them. That ain't NASA's fault.
They ought just get rid of the term Republican and Democrat and call it the Bipartisan party.
Because the Bush administration asked them to that's why. Someone convinced him to want to go back to the moon and beyond. And also different contractors did in fact design the pieces. ATK for one. Thiokol has been building solid rocket boosters for a while now.
It's supposed to tumble. How the hell do you think the escape system on the capsule would save you otherwise? Someone said it's complicated. I watched the NASA channel a couple of days ago and saw the simulation. The real thing looks pretty much the same to me. You want to make sure it separates like that in an emergency. The Apollo program had much the same thing. The front section was just a dummy load much like Saturn 1 had.
What's with the negative waves man? I watched it. It did exactly what they said it was supposed to. So I guess it's still criticize NASA time around here. BTW minor stuff is expected.
Who says it has to be made of steel that close to the road? Yeah, induction and better roads, expensive, but it should work. I have another idea, roads built like the old slot car tracks. Drive off of the battery until you get to the main road. From there latch onto slot and away you go. Computer controlled safety with auto pilot.
I'm also waiting for those damn flying cars that were promised.
I understand your thinking. I did something similar around the same time. I guess it's age kicking in, but right now I'm real grumpy about the overall state of the world economy now that I see many that know how to fix things but no one doing it. This ain't just in IT, it's everywhere now.
My brother got into IT being unqualified. He had an electronics degree and some luck and back then probably the only training you could get was to train yourself.
--You have to clean up poop sometimes, but it's decent money.--
Most of time if you are an RN an LPN or Nursing Assistant does that. The economy is even starting to affect that. I would say if you have a stable job, keep it.
Thanks the GPS thing did sound stupid but when read in context none of the laws now seem out of line. It seems like more and more snippets of information is all that you get fooling you into believing something that just plainly isn't true.
--So no, this law does not go too far, in fact it does not go far enough. It should mandate that anyone found driving while distracted be charged with reckless endangerment of human life.--
We'll the GPS thing sounds ridiculous to me. If anything it would be more help than distracting, but to really find out conduct a double blind study of all of the things that you want to ban and be specific.
I'm not taking up for Scientology or anything but couldn't the French now go on to call any non state sponsored religion (Catholic Church) fraud? So I'm not so sure they are the other way around. I, personally do not want my taxes spent on a state sponsored church. Now if they take up arms or threaten people (Scientology) then they should be convicted for that. Then again maybe the French really did catch them stealing money. It's really hard to get specific information from the media here, you know.
Funny, but maybe. I was thinking about the electronic warfare packages.
You see, I really just don't get it. Did we sell the hardware to Syria? If we didn't, I don't think that was the most like method used. I also think that the Israelis are just as capable of doing the same thing.
--They know they would be first against the wall--
No they don't know that or they wouldn't be doing this in the first place. I agree with your other assessments of short term thinking but they think they will get away with it and we will be left holding the bag. How many Nazi war criminals got away percentage wise? Few? Half? Most all of them?
--It's the stuff that's 100 miles higher & more that will be up there for centuries if not millennia.--
True but I was on a roll. You get my point. OK the stuff at 100 miles and higher is getting ever more crowded. Were going to have rings at some point without a moon, but it might be a long way off.
This is a good point or maybe a bad one depending upon which side you are on. I guess we need to be for open hardware, but really how would you know if the part is being supplied by the Chinese? It really would be hard to test for it. As for the Syrian stuff. That was just probably old Soviet stuff that got jammed by high powered AESA. No the Russians keep stuff to their selves like we do. They might sell countries weapons as we do, but there will something in there that is left out of the export package.
--This is a nearly inevitable end for every big bureaucracy not just NASA's.--
Now you've done it. You are into the real subject that matters. Small business employees 85% of the workers. 1% that own 90% of the wealth got bailed out twice by both the Republicans and Democrats. So it appears Washington and Wall-street are one and the same. The head of the treasury worked for GS. GS and MS got bailed out under both Democrats and Republicans. OK I see a disturbing pattern here.
I am very sure that you are right about that bureaucracy thing, but on the other side of things, I can see where you would need to put up with a big bureaucracy, because there wouldn't be another way to make unprofitable things happen.
--flaws now far outweigh its benefits--
I'm not so sure. A lot of this blame can be placed squarely at the ones running the government. Of course NASA is going to tell them what they want to hear to keep their jobs. I still think they are worth something. Maybe they need to make some changes to shake things up and the space program is really a prestige thing at this point.
Back in the day is was a race to beat the Russians. The race is over and people now need some other form of motivation to work off the clock and things like that.
What some said about the boosters coming from Utah and all of the other pork in the project makes me think that stuff was wanted by a congressman or they wouldn't vote for the bill. So NASA may also be hamstrung by that aspect as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't quote it exactly, and wondered if anyone would catch on to that.
--Sure they can. Many of pre-ESAS plans for lunar exploration used the Atlas V or Delta IV rockets.--
Doubtful, when you add everything up, but I guess they could send more than one just like Ares.
--First, this isn't the case -- Aerojet builds solid rockets for the Atlas V. More importantly, you seem to be under the strange assumption that solid rockets are necessary for a manned system, when the evidence seems to indicate that (when compared to liquid propellant) they actually result in a considerably more dangerous launch environment for crew.--
OK, Aerojet does in fact build those little boosters. So OK within a given budget, how would you do it? And why exactly would solid rockets be any more or less dangerous? I think if you compare the shuttle launches against the Soyuz launches, that the failure rate is just about the same although the shuttle did have more loss of life but only one of those accidents was caused by SRB failure. I think this is a myth as I know of only one failure in manned mission relating to this. So you have pointed out a much smaller player in SRB design that I wasn't aware of. I doesn't change much IMO.
I just don't think it is the track record of NASA that I would question as much as the track record of the rule makers (Congress, and the President).
I'm not assuming anything, I just think that solid rockets make the most sense at least for the first few stages. The Trident, Minuteman III, SRB's and many others are already proven, but whatever they use has to be man rated, so NASA would have to test either way, because I don't think the Delta's or Atlas V are man rated either, still it might be a little cheaper to go that route.
Yeah, or maybe flying cars. I wonder what the mileage is on those? OR maybe 400 MPH cars. That's the ticket right there.
With all of the mergers, what other company cold deliver a working booster beside Thiokol? The Atlas or Deltas will not take you to the moon.
--NASA works a lot better when its overseeing the design and development work of private companies than when it's trying to act as an overseer for itself.--
I agree but what choice do they have now in contractors actually capable of fulfilling the contracts? Back in the 60's there might have been 4 or 5 companies that would be able to bid. Now you have 2 with only 1 have any real chance.
As far as I know ATK is the only company really building solid rockets right now. Even the strap on boosters for the other programs are made by them. That ain't NASA's fault.
They ought just get rid of the term Republican and Democrat and call it the Bipartisan party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Race_2000
Because the Bush administration asked them to that's why. Someone convinced him to want to go back to the moon and beyond. And also different contractors did in fact design the pieces. ATK for one. Thiokol has been building solid rocket boosters for a while now.
It's supposed to tumble. How the hell do you think the escape system on the capsule would save you otherwise? Someone said it's complicated. I watched the NASA channel a couple of days ago and saw the simulation. The real thing looks pretty much the same to me. You want to make sure it separates like that in an emergency. The Apollo program had much the same thing. The front section was just a dummy load much like Saturn 1 had.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_I
Read. The first four Saturn 1's were sub orbital.
What's with the negative waves man? I watched it. It did exactly what they said it was supposed to. So I guess it's still criticize NASA time around here. BTW minor stuff is expected.
--Good luck putting 53kWh of energy into a battery in "a matter of minutes". --
You could do it in seconds, if you standardized the batteries and had battery stations for long trips. It would require some automation of course.
Um, it pollutes less?
Who says it has to be made of steel that close to the road? Yeah, induction and better roads, expensive, but it should work. I have another idea, roads built like the old slot car tracks. Drive off of the battery until you get to the main road. From there latch onto slot and away you go. Computer controlled safety with auto pilot.
I'm also waiting for those damn flying cars that were promised.
Wanna sell it?
--Cons: ;)--
You'll never hear anyone talking about crazy dot-edu or dot-org pay.
How exactly is this a con? Most of the talk about crazy pay, we'll was just crazy.
--The survival of your job depends in part on survival of their funding.--
This one is definitely something to think about but the rest of your cons seem like pros to me.
I understand your thinking. I did something similar around the same time. I guess it's age kicking in, but right now I'm real grumpy about the overall state of the world economy now that I see many that know how to fix things but no one doing it. This ain't just in IT, it's everywhere now.
My brother got into IT being unqualified. He had an electronics degree and some luck and back then probably the only training you could get was to train yourself.
--You have to clean up poop sometimes, but it's decent money.--
Most of time if you are an RN an LPN or Nursing Assistant does that. The economy is even starting to affect that. I would say if you have a stable job, keep it.
No, jamming Syrian radar with or without our help. I hear they have some stuff their selves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbit_Systems
I don't think they we need us Mr. Pope on a Rope.
Thanks the GPS thing did sound stupid but when read in context none of the laws now seem out of line. It seems like more and more snippets of information is all that you get fooling you into believing something that just plainly isn't true.
--So no, this law does not go too far, in fact it does not go far enough. It should mandate that anyone found driving while distracted be charged with reckless endangerment of human life.--
We'll the GPS thing sounds ridiculous to me. If anything it would be more help than distracting, but to really find out conduct a double blind study of all of the things that you want to ban and be specific.
I'm not taking up for Scientology or anything but couldn't the French now go on to call any non state sponsored religion (Catholic Church) fraud? So I'm not so sure they are the other way around. I, personally do not want my taxes spent on a state sponsored church. Now if they take up arms or threaten people (Scientology) then they should be convicted for that. Then again maybe the French really did catch them stealing money. It's really hard to get specific information from the media here, you know.
Funny, but maybe. I was thinking about the electronic warfare packages.
You see, I really just don't get it. Did we sell the hardware to Syria? If we didn't, I don't think that was the most like method used. I also think that the Israelis are just as capable of doing the same thing.
--They know they would be first against the wall--
No they don't know that or they wouldn't be doing this in the first place. I agree with your other assessments of short term thinking but they think they will get away with it and we will be left holding the bag. How many Nazi war criminals got away percentage wise? Few? Half? Most all of them?
--It's the stuff that's 100 miles higher & more that will be up there for centuries if not millennia.--
True but I was on a roll. You get my point. OK the stuff at 100 miles and higher is getting ever more crowded. Were going to have rings at some point without a moon, but it might be a long way off.
This is a good point or maybe a bad one depending upon which side you are on. I guess we need to be for open hardware, but really how would you know if the part is being supplied by the Chinese? It really would be hard to test for it. As for the Syrian stuff. That was just probably old Soviet stuff that got jammed by high powered AESA. No the Russians keep stuff to their selves like we do. They might sell countries weapons as we do, but there will something in there that is left out of the export package.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Electronically_Scanned_Array
The Russians probably didn't sell AESA to Syria or if they did it was cut down in some fashion.
--This is a nearly inevitable end for every big bureaucracy not just NASA's.--
Now you've done it. You are into the real subject that matters. Small business employees 85% of the workers. 1% that own 90% of the wealth got bailed out twice by both the Republicans and Democrats. So it appears Washington and Wall-street are one and the same. The head of the treasury worked for GS. GS and MS got bailed out under both Democrats and Republicans. OK I see a disturbing pattern here.
I am very sure that you are right about that bureaucracy thing, but on the other side of things, I can see where you would need to put up with a big bureaucracy, because there wouldn't be another way to make unprofitable things happen.
--flaws now far outweigh its benefits--
I'm not so sure. A lot of this blame can be placed squarely at the ones running the government. Of course NASA is going to tell them what they want to hear to keep their jobs. I still think they are worth something. Maybe they need to make some changes to shake things up and the space program is really a prestige thing at this point.
Back in the day is was a race to beat the Russians. The race is over and people now need some other form of motivation to work off the clock and things like that.
What some said about the boosters coming from Utah and all of the other pork in the project makes me think that stuff was wanted by a congressman or they wouldn't vote for the bill. So NASA may also be hamstrung by that aspect as well.
I really think that might have been the brand of the only one I had go bad. It was in the ballast and worked it's way through the bulb.
So, you may have the answer. I usually don't buy the very cheapest that I can find either.