I recall some international guidelines and protocols governing the number of earth biojunk we can allow to hitchhike to planets or moons where life may or may have existed. The two Viking landers were sterilized in a large oven and then packed for launch - much to the dismay of the engineers who built them at the time who were concerned about thermal damage to the components as a result of this.
For whatever reason, NASA was reluctant to bake Pathfinder/Sojourner which landed in 1997 and instead baked bits and pieces (antennae, solar panels, parachute, etc.), and cleaned the rest (antibacterial windex, I guess) so that Pathfinder was "clean enough" - i.e., within the international guidelines.
I haven't found any info regarding the Spirit and Opportunity or the lost missions that may have impacted, however it's fair to assume that they, like Pathfinder and Mars Polar Lander (now in its own crater somewhere) went through some decontamination before launch, but Mars Climate Orbiter that burned on aerobraking gone awry was intended to orbit, not land, and may have not been so assiduously decontaminated. Like the famous Apollo example where astronauts retrieved a sneezed-on camera lens from a previous unmanned probe that still harbored some bugs, life is more hearty that we think.
Really? I always thought the lunar returns never bothered going back into earth orbit, but just plunged back into the atmosphere... any websites with info on this?
Viking I and II lasted from 6/76 and 8/76 to 11/82 and 4/80, respectively. Depends on how long the solar cells can grab a charge and aren't covered by dust and maybe on the batteries.
The same type of entry is planned for the Hugynes probe en route to Titan courtesy of the Cassini orbiter.
The other alternative used in the Viking mission is to have the entire spacecraft enter orbit and then separate and de-orbit the lander. Given the entry design, I don't see any real advantage to this for Beagle. In fact, it would just add complexity in the form of additional retrorockets and propellents.
We have enough experience with direct-descent entries (all lunar returns were this way, as was Mars Pathfinder, probably others) that if the mission has suffered a catastrophic failure, it's probably not because of missing an entry corridor (which, since Mars' atmosphere is so thin, is far wider than it would be for Earth).
Both of NASA's probes (Spirit and Opportunity) are programmed to transmit a series of status tones (several hundred, in fact) to indicate their state of health during descent, major events as they occur, and faults, if any. However, it's not sure whether the ionization which occurs during atmospheric entry will will block the signals. Until the advent of geosynchronous communications satellietes, all earth re-entries experienced some kind of blackout (the Shuttle has antennae in its tail which can "see" the overhead satellites during all of reentry). Tougher to do on Mars, I'd bet, but a good idea.
Since Mars Observer fell silent just 3 days prior to entering orbit around Mars, following the pressurization of the rocket thruster fuel tanks, my impression is that it flew past Mars, did not impact on the surface and remains in some eccentric sol-based orbit.
Of course, if it did hit the surface, the debris are worthy of analysis and could provide conclusive evidence of the failure scenario, but I haven't read about any efforts to image a Mars Observer debris field (locating the general area of such an impact should be straightforward since they did it for Mars Polar Lander).
I stand by both statements. Unless you are going to locate, retreive and analyze the debris, there is no conclusive way to determine the cause, for sure, ever.
See - http://www.msss.com/mars/observer/project/mo_loss/ moloss.html
The Coffey Board report stated that the most probable cause of the loss of communications with the spacecraft on Aug. 21, 1993, was a rupture of the fuel (monomethyl hydrazine (MMH)) pressurization side of the spacecraft's propulsion system, resulting in a pressurized leak of both helium gas and liquid MMH under the spacecraft's thermal blanket. The gas and liquid would most likely have leaked out from under the blanket in an unsymmetrical manner, resulting in a net spin rate. This high spin rate would cause the spacecraft to enter into the "contingency mode," which interrupted the stored command sequence and thus, did not turn the transmitter on.
Hydrazine is nasty stuff, extremely reactive and toxic. Even if the pressurized leak did not cause a fatal spin, then the hydrazine itself could have destroyed vital systems, or worse yet, if it found the oxydizer, ignited on contact since it's a hypergolic propellent.
The Board and JPL also identified five other possible causes:
1. failure of the electrical power system, due to a regulated power bus short circuit;
2. NTO tank over-pressurization and rupture due to pressurization regulator failure;
3. the accidental high-speed ejection of a NASA standard initiator from a pyro valve into the MMH tank or other spacecraft system.
4. Loss of function that prevented both the spacecraft's main and backup computers from controlling the spacecraft;
5. Loss of both the main and backup transmitters due to failure of an electronic part.
Try 1 for 1, not counting Beagle or the current Spirit and Opportunity probes.
The other failures did not involve airbags - Mars Observer was an orbiter that went silent some kind of problem with the thrusters is suspected to be the cause, but we'll never know for sure; Mars Climate Orbiter got crispy over the metric/imperial units mixup during aerobraking/orbit insertion; and Mars Polar Lander did, in fact, attempt a Viking-like powered descent and it's theorized that when the landing legs deployed and locked, they incorrectly signaled the guidance system that the craft had landed, and the engine cut off too early, and it fell from a height of some 50m.
Mars Climate Orbiter suffered from the metric/imperial conversion snafu. See - http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/news/mco990930.html
The official hypothesis for MPL is that when its landing legs deployed the "thunk" sent spurious "touchdown" data to the guidance system, which, beleiving the lander was on the ground, shutdown the descent engine prematurely, resulting in.. well.. another crater on Mars.
Preemption occurs when Congress chooses to "occupy the field" under consideration in areas where, ideally, a uniform national standard is needed such as telecommunications (the FCC), commerce (the FTC), and nuclear energy (NRC), to name a few. When Congress chooses to act in this way pursuant to one of its enumerated powers (the power to regulate interstate commerce is a the last-ditch catchall when they can't think of anything else), the States are "preempted" from also regulating this field. This explain why we have one set of FCC regs, and not a patchwork of different standards from state to state or between federal and state levels. Of course, I am oversimplifying tremendously, but that's the general idea. States can still regulate these areas to a certain degree, but only insofar as their regulation doesn't interfere with Congressional acts. For example, if a particular state wanted to add the condition that all cell phone towers over a certain height had to have a blinking red light visible from a certain distance, this would probably be okay, assuming it didn't contradict anything Congress (or the FCC, as Congressional deglegee) has done.
The marijuana issue you raise is a horse of a different color - and is, strictly speaking, an issue caused by being the subject of two sovereign powers, (so-called "dual sovereignty") the state and federal government. Technically speaking, the Feds can prosecute one for many crimes which are usually handled by the States, but simply don't. U.S. Attorneys save their resources for true "federal cases" or for areas in which they have exclusive jurisdiction (i.e., interstate trafficking of some kind (usually drugs, money, or kiddie porn), crimes committed on federal property, or crimes directed at a federal-regulated activity (like insider trading), and so forth.)
An example would be a hypothetical ex-nfl running back who is acquitted (or even convicted) of murder by a state jury who is then indicted and tried under an equivalent offense under the United States Code by the local U.S. Attorney. The first case is "State v. Running Back" the second case would be "United States v. Running Back." It's rather rare for both sovereigns to prosecute for the same crime, but it happens to the truly deserving, I believe most recently to one of the OKC bombing geniuses. More often, the decision between a State and Federal prosecution in a high-profile cases is based upon the availability of certain punishments, like the death penalty which is not available in all states, or may be available if the prosecution takes place under Federal, rather than State law.
I dont know if they were installed for the "wow, that's neat" factor or for some actual purpose, but recent missions have flown with cameras mounted near the top of the external tank, looking aft. Doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to mount similar cameras in positions on the flanks of the ET that could view each wing throughout the ascent.
In 1999, CNN (http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9905/04/downlinks/) reported as follows:
"As a result, criticality one failure probabilities in the main engines have been reduced 83 percent to 1 in 993. The solid rocket boosters (culprit in the Challenger disaster) now pose a 1 in 1,152 chance of causing a catastrophic failure -- a 76 percent improvement in the past seven years. Overall, the chances of a shuttle having a criticality one failure are now 1 in 438. That means statistically, the shuttles could fly out their useful life without a calamity."
Reminds me of that old Yogi Berra saying, "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."
From SciFi's "BG: Lowdown" it seems the creators have been heavily influenced by Babylon 5 (more of a space-opera than the original BG) and Fox's stillborn "Space: Above and Beyond" (what little of the combat sequences shown by Sci-Fi reminded me a lot of Space: Above and Beyond).
I agree with the parent - they could have made it better, even if Richard Hatch (the original Apollo) bitches and moans about it. If this were the same story, same characters with modern CGI, I would be far less optimistic and more likely to think it's just an attempt to milk whatever life still exists in the franchise. (Is Kenneth Johnson reading this as he works on "V: the Next Generation" for NBC?) Given that they're using the same framework, enhanced mythology, and moving in a new direction, it could be a great concept... besides, is anyone going to argue that Dirk Benedict is a sexier Starbuck than this one?
His intent is to force debate on the issue, notwithstanding prior Treaties to the contrary that seem to apply. See this press release: http://www.space-frontier.org/FFO/story/2003/11/6/ 194313/618
The major lagal hurdle to me is this: although NEAR-Shoemaker is U.S. property, it is allegedly tresspassing on non-U.S. property. I'm farily sure the ruling sovereign alone has authority to issue the parking ticket (if I speed down a street in Canada, I get a ticket from the local cops, not from those in my hometown, right?). Without deciding who/what the "local authority" is (or might be), a court can simply state that it lacks authority to grant the requested relief, thereby deftly avoiding the merits of the claim and even the jurisdictional issue (which could possibly be overcome because the probe is U.S. government property). Tack on a footnote that this opinion is not suitable for publication, nor should be considered binding precedent and you're all set for a trip to the Court or Appeals (which will almost surely affirm) followed by a denial of review by the Supreme Court. End of story.
Isn't everything fission-derived, technically speaking?;) Just kidding. Offshore windfarms are more intriguing to me... clean, renewable, and out of view if done far enough off the coast.
Not entirely true - at the high lunar latitutes, there are areas which experience perpetual sunlight and also perpetual darkness. The former may be useful sites for energy-producing solar collectors, the latter for scientific instruments like infrared sensors that love the cold-soak. There is also data from Clementine suggesting water-ice in these perpetually-shadowed craters. If in sufficient quantity, that solves an important supply issue (assuming it is suitable for our needs).
Also, because the moon rotates at the same rate it revolves around the Earth, the side we never see is sheilded from earthshine across the entire EM spectrum - which makes it a nice place to set up radio telescopes or the like. Imagine a telescope grid set across kilometers of lunar surface, the inferometric possibilities are immense, and it could easily revolutionize many types of astronomy the way Hubble has for optical.
I would favor "field testing" exploration techniques for a decade or more in the lunar environment while continuing unmanned reconnaissance of Mars, much like we did with the moon prior to Apollo. While the two are different because of Mars' atmosphere and the potention that it once had liquid water on its surface, many of the same in situ hazards are the same. Why not learn closer to home at first?
This seems to be the first thing that makes sense to me that's being proposed for NASA in the last two decades, maybe more.
Each record is encased in a protective aluminum jacket, together with a cartridge and a needle. Instructions, in symbolic language, explain the origin of the spacecraft and indicate how the record is to be played. Pioneers 10 and 11, which preceded Voyager, both carried small metal plaques identifying their time and place of origin for the benefit of any other spacefarers that might find them in the distant future.
Here is a diagram: http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/images/VgrC over.jpg
It appears that current solar-powered satellites are impractical beyond Mars because of the dropoff in solar intensity at the distances involved (inverse square law).
Saturn is on average 9.54 times as far from the Sun as Earth is. The inverse-square law tells us that the intensity of sunlight falling on Saturn is thus 1/(9.54^2) or about 1/91 or 0.011 of the light falling on Earth. The standard value for the energy in sunlight is 1350 watts per square meter at 1 AU (Earth's distance from the sun, 93 million miles). As far away as Saturn, you see about 15 (14.83) watts per square meter.
According to this from NASA, http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/safety/solar.pdf, if Cassini were designed with solar arrays, they would have to be over 500 square meters (5,380 square feet)in size.
Maybe Spaceflightnow.com clarifies this a little -
"The termination shock is where the solar wind, a thin stream of electrically charged gas blown constantly from the sun, is slowed by pressure from gas between the stars. At the termination shock, the solar wind slows abruptly from its average speed of 700,000 to 1,500,000 mph."
SOHO's website - http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/ has some fantastic views, especially.mpeg loops through a couple of different sensors of the actual eruption, click on the link to the X17.2 Flare.
How many Nasa.gov sites can be/.'d at once I wonder?
Supersonic aircraft don't leave a wake of shattered glass and spooked cattle in their wake. Although the Concorde has a reputation for being noisy at low altitudes, particularly on takeoff, it only makes sonic booms passing through Mach 1 when accellerating or decelerating. This occurs offshore, away from populated areas. No reason why it couldn't fly supersonic across the Continental U.S., so long as it accellerated and decelerated off each coast.
In 1990, a SR-71 set the following records over the Continental U.S. - I dont recall any massive blast damage from these runs:
West Coast to East Coast of USA (National Record-Speed Over a Recognized Course): Coast to Coast Distance: 2,404.05 statute miles...Time: 1 hr 07 min 53.69 secs...Average Speed: 2,124.51 mph
Los Angeles To Washington D.C. (World Record): Distance: 2,299.67 statute miles...Time: 1 hr 04 min 19.89 secs...Average Speed: 2,144.83 mph
St Louis To Cincinnati (World Record): Distance: 311.44 statute miles...Time: 8 mins 31.97 secs...Average Speed: 2,189.94 mph
Kansas City To Washington D.C. (World Record): Distance: 942.08 statute miles...Time: 25 mins 58.53 secs...Average Speed: 2176.08 mph
Not all of the shuttle is coated with tiles. Some of the low-temp. areas (side fuselage, tops of wings, cargo bay doors) have insulating "blankets" that may be similar to this material. Generally, the low temp. areas are white on the shuttle, high temp. areas using the "black tiles" (nose, underbelly) with the reinforced carbon-carbon in the highest temp. areas (nosecap, leading edges of wings).
As for this stuff, it may be well-suited for tile repair or use as a tile substitute or augmentation in some areas. Clearly, more testing is needed.
Also, if it washes off - how good is that ? Shuttles get soaked all the time sitting on the pad.
Slashdot Mirror
For whatever reason, NASA was reluctant to bake Pathfinder/Sojourner which landed in 1997 and instead baked bits and pieces (antennae, solar panels, parachute, etc.), and cleaned the rest (antibacterial windex, I guess) so that Pathfinder was "clean enough" - i.e., within the international guidelines.
I haven't found any info regarding the Spirit and Opportunity or the lost missions that may have impacted, however it's fair to assume that they, like Pathfinder and Mars Polar Lander (now in its own crater somewhere) went through some decontamination before launch, but Mars Climate Orbiter that burned on aerobraking gone awry was intended to orbit, not land, and may have not been so assiduously decontaminated. Like the famous Apollo example where astronauts retrieved a sneezed-on camera lens from a previous unmanned probe that still harbored some bugs, life is more hearty that we think.
Spaceflightnow.com has pre-launch and in situ pictures of the plaque here: http://www.spaceflightnow.com/mars/mera/040106colu mbia.html
Really? I always thought the lunar returns never bothered going back into earth orbit, but just plunged back into the atmosphere... any websites with info on this?
Viking I and II lasted from 6/76 and 8/76 to 11/82 and 4/80, respectively. Depends on how long the solar cells can grab a charge and aren't covered by dust and maybe on the batteries.
The other alternative used in the Viking mission is to have the entire spacecraft enter orbit and then separate and de-orbit the lander. Given the entry design, I don't see any real advantage to this for Beagle. In fact, it would just add complexity in the form of additional retrorockets and propellents.
We have enough experience with direct-descent entries (all lunar returns were this way, as was Mars Pathfinder, probably others) that if the mission has suffered a catastrophic failure, it's probably not because of missing an entry corridor (which, since Mars' atmosphere is so thin, is far wider than it would be for Earth).
Both of NASA's probes (Spirit and Opportunity) are programmed to transmit a series of status tones (several hundred, in fact) to indicate their state of health during descent, major events as they occur, and faults, if any. However, it's not sure whether the ionization which occurs during atmospheric entry will will block the signals. Until the advent of geosynchronous communications satellietes, all earth re-entries experienced some kind of blackout (the Shuttle has antennae in its tail which can "see" the overhead satellites during all of reentry). Tougher to do on Mars, I'd bet, but a good idea.
Of course, if it did hit the surface, the debris are worthy of analysis and could provide conclusive evidence of the failure scenario, but I haven't read about any efforts to image a Mars Observer debris field (locating the general area of such an impact should be straightforward since they did it for Mars Polar Lander).
I stand by both statements. Unless you are going to locate, retreive and analyze the debris, there is no conclusive way to determine the cause, for sure, ever.
See - http://www.msss.com/mars/observer/project/mo_loss/ moloss.html
The Coffey Board report stated that the most probable cause of the loss of communications with the spacecraft on Aug. 21, 1993, was a rupture of the fuel (monomethyl hydrazine (MMH)) pressurization side of the spacecraft's propulsion system, resulting in a pressurized leak of both helium gas and liquid MMH under the spacecraft's thermal blanket. The gas and liquid would most likely have leaked out from under the blanket in an unsymmetrical manner, resulting in a net spin rate. This high spin rate would cause the spacecraft to enter into the "contingency mode," which interrupted the stored command sequence and thus, did not turn the transmitter on.
Hydrazine is nasty stuff, extremely reactive and toxic. Even if the pressurized leak did not cause a fatal spin, then the hydrazine itself could have destroyed vital systems, or worse yet, if it found the oxydizer, ignited on contact since it's a hypergolic propellent.
The Board and JPL also identified five other possible causes:
1. failure of the electrical power system, due to a regulated power bus short circuit;
2. NTO tank over-pressurization and rupture due to pressurization regulator failure;
3. the accidental high-speed ejection of a NASA standard initiator from a pyro valve into the MMH tank or other spacecraft system.
4. Loss of function that prevented both the spacecraft's main and backup computers from controlling the spacecraft;
5. Loss of both the main and backup transmitters due to failure of an electronic part.
The other failures did not involve airbags - Mars Observer was an orbiter that went silent some kind of problem with the thrusters is suspected to be the cause, but we'll never know for sure; Mars Climate Orbiter got crispy over the metric/imperial units mixup during aerobraking/orbit insertion; and Mars Polar Lander did, in fact, attempt a Viking-like powered descent and it's theorized that when the landing legs deployed and locked, they incorrectly signaled the guidance system that the craft had landed, and the engine cut off too early, and it fell from a height of some 50m.
The official hypothesis for MPL is that when its landing legs deployed the "thunk" sent spurious "touchdown" data to the guidance system, which, beleiving the lander was on the ground, shutdown the descent engine prematurely, resulting in.. well.. another crater on Mars.
The marijuana issue you raise is a horse of a different color - and is, strictly speaking, an issue caused by being the subject of two sovereign powers, (so-called "dual sovereignty") the state and federal government. Technically speaking, the Feds can prosecute one for many crimes which are usually handled by the States, but simply don't. U.S. Attorneys save their resources for true "federal cases" or for areas in which they have exclusive jurisdiction (i.e., interstate trafficking of some kind (usually drugs, money, or kiddie porn), crimes committed on federal property, or crimes directed at a federal-regulated activity (like insider trading), and so forth.)
An example would be a hypothetical ex-nfl running back who is acquitted (or even convicted) of murder by a state jury who is then indicted and tried under an equivalent offense under the United States Code by the local U.S. Attorney. The first case is "State v. Running Back" the second case would be "United States v. Running Back." It's rather rare for both sovereigns to prosecute for the same crime, but it happens to the truly deserving, I believe most recently to one of the OKC bombing geniuses. More often, the decision between a State and Federal prosecution in a high-profile cases is based upon the availability of certain punishments, like the death penalty which is not available in all states, or may be available if the prosecution takes place under Federal, rather than State law.
I dont know if they were installed for the "wow, that's neat" factor or for some actual purpose, but recent missions have flown with cameras mounted near the top of the external tank, looking aft. Doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to mount similar cameras in positions on the flanks of the ET that could view each wing throughout the ascent.
"As a result, criticality one failure probabilities in the main engines have been reduced 83 percent to 1 in 993. The solid rocket boosters (culprit in the Challenger disaster) now pose a 1 in 1,152 chance of causing a catastrophic failure -- a 76 percent improvement in the past seven years. Overall, the chances of a shuttle having a criticality one failure are now 1 in 438. That means statistically, the shuttles could fly out their useful life without a calamity."
Reminds me of that old Yogi Berra saying, "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."
Last time I checked, none of Jupiter's moons orbited the Earth, so don't worry about JIMO falling on your head.
I agree with the parent - they could have made it better, even if Richard Hatch (the original Apollo) bitches and moans about it. If this were the same story, same characters with modern CGI, I would be far less optimistic and more likely to think it's just an attempt to milk whatever life still exists in the franchise. (Is Kenneth Johnson reading this as he works on "V: the Next Generation" for NBC?) Given that they're using the same framework, enhanced mythology, and moving in a new direction, it could be a great concept... besides, is anyone going to argue that Dirk Benedict is a sexier Starbuck than this one?
Let's not forget that this guy lost an election to someone who had died before we nominate him for any humanitarian awards.
The major lagal hurdle to me is this: although NEAR-Shoemaker is U.S. property, it is allegedly tresspassing on non-U.S. property. I'm farily sure the ruling sovereign alone has authority to issue the parking ticket (if I speed down a street in Canada, I get a ticket from the local cops, not from those in my hometown, right?). Without deciding who/what the "local authority" is (or might be), a court can simply state that it lacks authority to grant the requested relief, thereby deftly avoiding the merits of the claim and even the jurisdictional issue (which could possibly be overcome because the probe is U.S. government property). Tack on a footnote that this opinion is not suitable for publication, nor should be considered binding precedent and you're all set for a trip to the Court or Appeals (which will almost surely affirm) followed by a denial of review by the Supreme Court. End of story.
Isn't everything fission-derived, technically speaking? ;) Just kidding. Offshore windfarms are more intriguing to me... clean, renewable, and out of view if done far enough off the coast.
Also, because the moon rotates at the same rate it revolves around the Earth, the side we never see is sheilded from earthshine across the entire EM spectrum - which makes it a nice place to set up radio telescopes or the like. Imagine a telescope grid set across kilometers of lunar surface, the inferometric possibilities are immense, and it could easily revolutionize many types of astronomy the way Hubble has for optical.
I would favor "field testing" exploration techniques for a decade or more in the lunar environment while continuing unmanned reconnaissance of Mars, much like we did with the moon prior to Apollo. While the two are different because of Mars' atmosphere and the potention that it once had liquid water on its surface, many of the same in situ hazards are the same. Why not learn closer to home at first?
This seems to be the first thing that makes sense to me that's being proposed for NASA in the last two decades, maybe more.
Here is a diagram: http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/images/VgrC over.jpg
Saturn is on average 9.54 times as far from the Sun as Earth is. The inverse-square law tells us that the intensity of sunlight falling on Saturn is thus 1/(9.54^2) or about 1/91 or 0.011 of the light falling on Earth. The standard value for the energy in sunlight is 1350 watts per square meter at 1 AU (Earth's distance from the sun, 93 million miles). As far away as Saturn, you see about 15 (14.83) watts per square meter.
According to this from NASA, http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/safety/solar .pdf, if Cassini were designed with solar arrays, they would have to be over 500 square meters (5,380 square feet)in size.
"The termination shock is where the solar wind, a thin stream of electrically charged gas blown constantly from the sun, is slowed by pressure from gas between the stars. At the termination shock, the solar wind slows abruptly from its average speed of 700,000 to 1,500,000 mph."
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0311/05voyager /
How many Nasa.gov sites can be /.'d at once I wonder?
In 1990, a SR-71 set the following records over the Continental U.S. - I dont recall any massive blast damage from these runs:
West Coast to East Coast of USA (National Record-Speed Over a Recognized Course): Coast to Coast Distance: 2,404.05 statute miles...Time: 1 hr 07 min 53.69 secs...Average Speed: 2,124.51 mph
Los Angeles To Washington D.C. (World Record): Distance: 2,299.67 statute miles...Time: 1 hr 04 min 19.89 secs...Average Speed: 2,144.83 mph
St Louis To Cincinnati (World Record): Distance: 311.44 statute miles...Time: 8 mins 31.97 secs...Average Speed: 2,189.94 mph
Kansas City To Washington D.C. (World Record): Distance: 942.08 statute miles...Time: 25 mins 58.53 secs...Average Speed: 2176.08 mph
As for this stuff, it may be well-suited for tile repair or use as a tile substitute or augmentation in some areas. Clearly, more testing is needed.
Also, if it washes off - how good is that ? Shuttles get soaked all the time sitting on the pad.