When the president finishes his 8 years in office and gets to hand pick a successor that amends the Russian constitution to give the aforementioned president 12 more years in office, it's not that far off.
Huh? Any extremely large object is going to be noticed more than a year before it hits. The earth rotates around the sun, giving us no more than a few months blindness to any one direction.
It's not worrisome at all. It was not detected until then because it is very small and poses no threat even if it impacts. It's much easier to find larger objects. If an object large enough to cause a global catastrophe was on it's way toward us, we would have way more advance warning than 3 days with these kinds of efforts.
While it may seem like a great idea to re-use and re-purpose old Shuttle designs for a new heavy-lift vehicle (HLV) on the surface, in fact, it's something that is not being done for its technical merit. Instead, this design is one that's mandated by Congress. The 535 meddlers instructed NASA not to design and implement the best design or the most practical and capable craft
While that may be true, Ares I was NOT the most capable craft. This was known to the engineers before the project even began and became increasingly clear as it progressed. First with the thrust oscillation problems, then with the needed gutting of the Orion spacecraft to accommodate the underpowered rocket which had it's lift capacity continually overestimated.
The plan approved by Congress mandates something like the DIRECT option (a SD-HLV, likely inline), which will give us a vehicle that is far more capable and that will be completed quicker than Ares I and for less money.
Well of course I don't know how it will all turn out, but I think the option that was chosen in this bill (SDHLV/Direct) is the most viable and provides the most affordable and realistic successor to Shuttle.
The difference here is that this program (likely utilizing DIRECT) is way more executable within NASA's existing ~$19b/year budget, whereas Constellation was not.
Constellation required an increase in the budget which was a non-starter.
Also, the bill quoted was the House compromise bill, which was not the one eventually passed (which was from the Senate, the House passed it unamended). And that one is not law yet. It has not been signed by the President.
Multiple members stated that they worked closely with the Appropriations committees in drafting this bill and developed an understanding such that the Appropriations bill will track closely with the Authorization.
I don't blame them for the end of the shuttle program, but they certainly do get the blame for canceling any hope of future manned space flight!
Huh?
The NASA bill recently passed by Congress funds a new government launcher for Orion and deep space missions and includes $1.2 billion in funding over the next 3 years to start building commercial crew vehicles. This money will be distributed to commercial operators under a commercial crew contract in a similar manner to the COTS contracts for cargo that were awarded to SpaceX and Orbital.
And really, this path will get us back into space faster than Constellation. Ares I was not going to be ready until 2017 according to the Augustine Committee. The new government vehicle is supposed to be done by 2016 and several of the potential commercial crew providers have said they can have their vehicles ready in 3 years.
1) Frankly, we don't know if there will be a government funded replacement for the shuttle ever.
False. The bill just passed by Congress sets a very specific requirement for the next government funded vehicle. It will be a heavy lift 75-100mt launcher.
So, is NASA going to build a DIRECT launcher now or will there be yet another politically-driven paper study of an over-engineered, under-performing white elephant?
The 2010 NASA Authorization bill recently passed by Congress mandates a new vehicle called the Space Launch System that will have to lift a minimum of 70 tons, evolvable to 130 tons with a second stage.
The bill states that the vehicle will have to be completed by the end of 2016 within a budget of $11.5 billion.
The only real option for a rocket of this capacity that can be built within this time and budget is something like the DIRECT architecture. NASA still has to decide the specifics though.
Slashdot Mirror
When the president finishes his 8 years in office and gets to hand pick a successor that amends the Russian constitution to give the aforementioned president 12 more years in office, it's not that far off.
My name is Chris Hanson you insensitive clod!
with bubblesort
The SkyNet central core.
They realized that computers in office buildings and dorm rooms aren't powerful enough.
Obama didn't cancel the shuttle, Bush did, and yes we do have a plan. It is the SLS.
http://www.universetoday.com/75522/president-signs-nasa-2010-authorization-act/
http://twitter.com/SpaceXer
"SpaceX is the first commercial company to reenter a spacecraft from space!"
She's not really growing in popularity as far as her chances of getting elected.
Her approval rating is at an all time low.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20018819-503544.html
So 50 years is the minimum; US law goes above and beyond that to 70 years to protect the rich Disney family
Fixed that for you.
Anyone know when we can expect CentOS 6?
are offline!
Huh? Any extremely large object is going to be noticed more than a year before it hits. The earth rotates around the sun, giving us no more than a few months blindness to any one direction.
It's not worrisome at all. It was not detected until then because it is very small and poses no threat even if it impacts. It's much easier to find larger objects. If an object large enough to cause a global catastrophe was on it's way toward us, we would have way more advance warning than 3 days with these kinds of efforts.
why does every type of problem that anyone encounters now have to be suffixed with "gate".
Not every problem is the result of a conspiracy to cover up illegal activity, so the analogy doesn't really fit imo.
Looks like this was just a case (no pun intended) of design oversight.
While it may seem like a great idea to re-use and re-purpose old Shuttle designs for a new heavy-lift vehicle (HLV) on the surface, in fact, it's something that is not being done for its technical merit. Instead, this design is one that's mandated by Congress. The 535 meddlers instructed NASA not to design and implement the best design or the most practical and capable craft
While that may be true, Ares I was NOT the most capable craft. This was known to the engineers before the project even began and became increasingly clear as it progressed. First with the thrust oscillation problems, then with the needed gutting of the Orion spacecraft to accommodate the underpowered rocket which had it's lift capacity continually overestimated.
The plan approved by Congress mandates something like the DIRECT option (a SD-HLV, likely inline), which will give us a vehicle that is far more capable and that will be completed quicker than Ares I and for less money.
Well of course I don't know how it will all turn out, but I think the option that was chosen in this bill (SDHLV/Direct) is the most viable and provides the most affordable and realistic successor to Shuttle.
a manned American spacecraft will never again light the sky
You're saying that my statement about 2016 is too uncertain, and then you are claiming to know what will happen FOREVER in the future? lol
The difference here is that this program (likely utilizing DIRECT) is way more executable within NASA's existing ~$19b/year budget, whereas Constellation was not.
Constellation required an increase in the budget which was a non-starter.
Also, the bill quoted was the House compromise bill, which was not the one eventually passed (which was from the Senate, the House passed it unamended). And that one is not law yet. It has not been signed by the President.
False on your false on my false. lol
Multiple members stated that they worked closely with the Appropriations committees in drafting this bill and developed an understanding such that the Appropriations bill will track closely with the Authorization.
Space X used private funding to develop all of their space launch vehicles
False. A significant portion of the development cost of Falcon 9 came from NASA funding under the COTS contract.
I don't blame them for the end of the shuttle program, but they certainly do get the blame for canceling any hope of future manned space flight!
Huh?
The NASA bill recently passed by Congress funds a new government launcher for Orion and deep space missions and includes $1.2 billion in funding over the next 3 years to start building commercial crew vehicles. This money will be distributed to commercial operators under a commercial crew contract in a similar manner to the COTS contracts for cargo that were awarded to SpaceX and Orbital.
And really, this path will get us back into space faster than Constellation. Ares I was not going to be ready until 2017 according to the Augustine Committee. The new government vehicle is supposed to be done by 2016 and several of the potential commercial crew providers have said they can have their vehicles ready in 3 years.
Human spaceflight in the US is far from dead.
1) Frankly, we don't know if there will be a government funded replacement for the shuttle ever.
False. The bill just passed by Congress sets a very specific requirement for the next government funded vehicle. It will be a heavy lift 75-100mt launcher.
So, is NASA going to build a DIRECT launcher now or will there be yet another politically-driven paper study of an over-engineered, under-performing white elephant?
The 2010 NASA Authorization bill recently passed by Congress mandates a new vehicle called the Space Launch System that will have to lift a minimum of 70 tons, evolvable to 130 tons with a second stage.
The bill states that the vehicle will have to be completed by the end of 2016 within a budget of $11.5 billion.
The only real option for a rocket of this capacity that can be built within this time and budget is something like the DIRECT architecture. NASA still has to decide the specifics though.
Dragon/Falcon is not man rated.
It was designed by SpaceX to meet NASA's existing requirements for human space flight.
However, requirements for commercial crew companies under the new model haven't even been released yet.
Enough! I've had it with this motherfucking joke about motherfucking planes!