Right. Cause the Japanese war machine was a good thing for the region and the world. And the Soviet Union in the 60s was a force for good. And Saddam was a great guy to party with.
You gotta look at where Iraq was when you say that. Yeah, Iraq isn't a paradise right now -- in fact it is a very dangerous place. But at least a dictator has been replaced by hope.
As far as Vietnam, the same principle applies. The French and the Communists had pretty much already screwed the place up. At least part of that country is free now.
Furthermore, our personal safety is just fine thank-you. First of all, we don't have ethnic cleansing going on in our borders and since 9/11, we've been thankfully free of homeland terrorism due largely to our effective foreign policy.
If you mean payload to LEO (or anywhere else) you are wrong. Based on actual launches, the S-V is King of the Hill. The Russian N-1 would have been, but it went KA-BOOM!
the Russians are the ONLY nation with a proven track record of building and long term manning a space station.
Simply FUD. I could just as easily say that the US is the ONLY nation with a proven track record of operating outside of LEO. The parent post is just another rant by a bitter old man somewhere.
Your concept of mutual respect sounds like modern NASA kind of politically correct mutual respect you practive during consenus building. Hire a bunch of people and "mutually respect" each other even if they're losers, and end up with a losing team with one failure after another.
Hell yea I'll take that bet... because I think they all know NASA is a joke at this point, and nobody wants to partner with Bush's arrogant America on anything at this point(excepting the UK).
Look's like we have a bet. Being right doesn't equate to being arrogant, and I for one am happy to keep foreigners out of the critical path and out of the militarily strategic high ground.
Stop dissing Mir.
It's hard not dissing the definition of a deathtrap. Between fires, progress collisions, and fritzy systems, Mir wasn't up to ISS' reliability. Plus, Skylab was better, bigger, and before its time.
Zarya and Zveda are the core of the station
They'd be lifeless, dark, and cold without the US contribution.
Speaking of dissing, you should lay of the Shuttle. It's humanity's best and most reliable (both in absolute and statistically significant) manned vehicle to LEO. Yeah, it's expensive. So what -- we can afford it.
Apollo did just fine without collocation and with Kennedy and the Manned Space Flight Center (now JSC). What the Parent forgets is that we live in the real world and like it or not, politics are real (and good actually). Putting JSC in Texas guaranteed funding.
Remember, politics are not bad -- it is how large groups of people in a democracy make decisions. What the parent suggests is, at best, a benevolent dictatorship and, at worst, is simply tyranny.
Kelly Johnson's "rules" are fine and dandy for single vehicle development efforts -- in fact they are fantastic. But the systems we are discussing are far beyond even the remarkable SR-71 and U-2. They are systems of systems and require deep thoughts about systems architectures that go way beyond what any list of "rules" prescribe. It's simply not enough to say "get a few good people together in a single place and throw pizza under the door until they are done."
Finally, any successful team requires mutual respect. Calling someone a "fucktard" or "barely coherent" probably explains why the parent hasn't been on any successful, non-collacted teams...
Let's make a simple bet -- I say CEV will launch before Klipper. Payoff -- an apology here. I'll even simplify it: any new launch vehicle by either country counts.
As you recall they built the core of the ISS because they had more than a decade experience of operating a continuosly manned space station on a budget far smaller than ISS. That leads to my point about doing more with less (Rutan and the RSA) versus doing less with more(NASA).
I think you are stretching it to say the FGB, a leftover, unlaunched Mir part, is the "core" of the ISS. It was simply the first (and delivered late) part of the ISS -- paid for by the US. There were several other US modules ready to go -- in fact, an interim control module was ready as a replacement. As far as Rutan, you know that his accomplishment isn't anywhere near orbital technology.
Score one for my plan because it would ax you
Trust me, I am not dependent on NASA funding -- or my parent's allowance like you...
Neither has anyone at NASA.
Actually, there are several Apollo-era scientists/engineers working at NASA and NASA's contractors. Moreover, the Shuttle was designed by them. Your critique of their design is simply monday morning quarterbacking and ignorance of the constraints they had to work within.
Its total insanity to have mission control and launch 1000 miles apart
How would you suggest returning from the moon? Should we send up the engineering team first? Lots of industries have non-collocated teams and do just fine. Moreover, the designs aren't exclusively done at JSC anyway -- they are done in California, Texas, Kansas, etc. In fact, only Mission Operations are anything close to being exclusively done at JSC. So what was your point?
NASA contracts are billions of dollars to Lockheed and Boeing
Yes, but these contracts are cost plus with razor thin margins (often less than 10%). Go look at Boeing's and LockMart's income statement and tell me that $100M is "massive" to them. NASA business pales in comparison to their DoD businesses.
Education is the cure to ignorance -- go to class.
Trust me, anyone that thinks Kliper is real is fundamentaly clueless. And anyone that thinks building a space transportation infrastructure by Kelly Johnson's "rules" is even more so.
Firing all the civil servants and contractors and starting over would be a horrendous mistake. All of our space flight knowledge would be lost. Handing it over to a hobbiest like Rutan would be just as silly. And calling the Russians a nucleus is a joke -- they haven't even left LEO.
And why in the world does proximity to the launch site make a hill of beans difference to the design effort?
Jobs program? None of the companies you mention or allude to could really care less about the tiny amount of contract dollars they get from NASA -- their NASA business represents a drop in the bucket to their other lines of business and at much lower margins.
Your solutions (I'm being generous here) are neither appropriate or practical.
Finally, some reality on Slashdot. This isn't the collective -- it's the real world. Most of what is touted as "successful" free projects are just poorly disguised pirated copies of made-for-profit solutions.
Here's a clue for you: just because someone wants to make a living and get paid for what they do doesn't mean they don't make quality products and love and their work.
Altruism is fine and great, but it doesn't pay the rent/mortgage or pay for the common defense.
Mod the parent up -- a sane opinion on slashdot. Why would anyone take issue with a publisher deciding where and/or when they want to sell their books? Intellectual property (and in this case physical property!) is real and it is perfectly reasonable to want to protect it. If we eliminate intellectual property rights, nothing will be created that's worth a damn.
Thanks for briefly stating your opinion. Some questions/comments:
1) Why is it ironic that the patent was issued on 9/11?
2) Yes, Microsoft and Bill are convicted monopolists. Rather than dispute that (which I could) I will just say that he paid the fine.
3) I support the US patent office and I give Bush a bad name? Huh?
4) Automation of a manual process seems like a reasonable patent to me and the US patent office... Their patent also include preferred embodiments and boundaries. You included a pretty big ellipsis...
That's the beauty of the patent system. If you are too vague, everyone will just invent around it. The less specific your patent is, the less likely it's enforceable.
Slashdot Mirror
the never-launched arrangement
:)
Kind of like the never-launched arrangement of Buran too. The buran that flew didn't have an APU -- the whole thing was full of freaking batteries.
I think we should stick to things that have been done. Otherwise, NASA can claim we've had manned Mars landings.
Vital? It was a freaking protective cover that's taken off prior to launch anyway!
More FUD.
Right. Cause the Japanese war machine was a good thing for the region and the world. And the Soviet Union in the 60s was a force for good. And Saddam was a great guy to party with.
Pfft.
You gotta look at where Iraq was when you say that. Yeah, Iraq isn't a paradise right now -- in fact it is a very dangerous place. But at least a dictator has been replaced by hope.
As far as Vietnam, the same principle applies. The French and the Communists had pretty much already screwed the place up. At least part of that country is free now.
Furthermore, our personal safety is just fine thank-you. First of all, we don't have ethnic cleansing going on in our borders and since 9/11, we've been thankfully free of homeland terrorism due largely to our effective foreign policy.
If you mean payload to LEO (or anywhere else) you are wrong. Based on actual launches, the S-V is King of the Hill. The Russian N-1 would have been, but it went KA-BOOM!
Simply FUD. I could just as easily say that the US is the ONLY nation with a proven track record of operating outside of LEO. The parent post is just another rant by a bitter old man somewhere.
Each of those places is better off now than it was before the US' involvement.
It won't be long and we'll be harvesting Antarctic resources -- which is a good thing.
The FAA paperwork requirements are actually quite basic:
http://ast.faa.gov/lrra/about_lrra.htmPre-application consultation;
Application evaluation, comprised of:
Policy review and approval; Safety review and approval; Payload review and determination; Financial responsibility determination; & Environmental review.Compliance monitoring.
Anything less is really a public dis-service. Which of these wouldn't you do before someone set off something with an impulse of >200,000 lb-sec?
Your concept of mutual respect sounds like modern NASA kind of politically correct mutual respect you practive during consenus building. Hire a bunch of people and "mutually respect" each other even if they're losers, and end up with a losing team with one failure after another.
You obviously don't know anyone at NASA.
Hell yea I'll take that bet... because I think they all know NASA is a joke at this point, and nobody wants to partner with Bush's arrogant America on anything at this point(excepting the UK).
Look's like we have a bet. Being right doesn't equate to being arrogant, and I for one am happy to keep foreigners out of the critical path and out of the militarily strategic high ground.
Stop dissing Mir.
It's hard not dissing the definition of a deathtrap. Between fires, progress collisions, and fritzy systems, Mir wasn't up to ISS' reliability. Plus, Skylab was better, bigger, and before its time.
Zarya and Zveda are the core of the station
They'd be lifeless, dark, and cold without the US contribution.
Speaking of dissing, you should lay of the Shuttle. It's humanity's best and most reliable (both in absolute and statistically significant) manned vehicle to LEO. Yeah, it's expensive. So what -- we can afford it.
Parent is high, Grandparent is spot on.
Apollo did just fine without collocation and with Kennedy and the Manned Space Flight Center (now JSC). What the Parent forgets is that we live in the real world and like it or not, politics are real (and good actually). Putting JSC in Texas guaranteed funding.
Remember, politics are not bad -- it is how large groups of people in a democracy make decisions. What the parent suggests is, at best, a benevolent dictatorship and, at worst, is simply tyranny.
Kelly Johnson's "rules" are fine and dandy for single vehicle development efforts -- in fact they are fantastic. But the systems we are discussing are far beyond even the remarkable SR-71 and U-2. They are systems of systems and require deep thoughts about systems architectures that go way beyond what any list of "rules" prescribe. It's simply not enough to say "get a few good people together in a single place and throw pizza under the door until they are done."
Finally, any successful team requires mutual respect. Calling someone a "fucktard" or "barely coherent" probably explains why the parent hasn't been on any successful, non-collacted teams...
Like CEV is real
Let's make a simple bet -- I say CEV will launch before Klipper. Payoff -- an apology here. I'll even simplify it: any new launch vehicle by either country counts.
As you recall they built the core of the ISS because they had more than a decade experience of operating a continuosly manned space station on a budget far smaller than ISS. That leads to my point about doing more with less (Rutan and the RSA) versus doing less with more(NASA).
I think you are stretching it to say the FGB, a leftover, unlaunched Mir part, is the "core" of the ISS. It was simply the first (and delivered late) part of the ISS -- paid for by the US. There were several other US modules ready to go -- in fact, an interim control module was ready as a replacement. As far as Rutan, you know that his accomplishment isn't anywhere near orbital technology.
Score one for my plan because it would ax you
Trust me, I am not dependent on NASA funding -- or my parent's allowance like you...
Neither has anyone at NASA.
Actually, there are several Apollo-era scientists/engineers working at NASA and NASA's contractors. Moreover, the Shuttle was designed by them. Your critique of their design is simply monday morning quarterbacking and ignorance of the constraints they had to work within.
Its total insanity to have mission control and launch 1000 miles apart
How would you suggest returning from the moon? Should we send up the engineering team first? Lots of industries have non-collocated teams and do just fine. Moreover, the designs aren't exclusively done at JSC anyway -- they are done in California, Texas, Kansas, etc. In fact, only Mission Operations are anything close to being exclusively done at JSC. So what was your point?
NASA contracts are billions of dollars to Lockheed and Boeing
Yes, but these contracts are cost plus with razor thin margins (often less than 10%). Go look at Boeing's and LockMart's income statement and tell me that $100M is "massive" to them. NASA business pales in comparison to their DoD businesses.
Education is the cure to ignorance -- go to class.
Trust me, anyone that thinks Kliper is real is fundamentaly clueless. And anyone that thinks building a space transportation infrastructure by Kelly Johnson's "rules" is even more so. Firing all the civil servants and contractors and starting over would be a horrendous mistake. All of our space flight knowledge would be lost. Handing it over to a hobbiest like Rutan would be just as silly. And calling the Russians a nucleus is a joke -- they haven't even left LEO. And why in the world does proximity to the launch site make a hill of beans difference to the design effort? Jobs program? None of the companies you mention or allude to could really care less about the tiny amount of contract dollars they get from NASA -- their NASA business represents a drop in the bucket to their other lines of business and at much lower margins. Your solutions (I'm being generous here) are neither appropriate or practical.
You sir, have set a new low.
Not true.
Yeah -- we'll have lots of innovative Linux copies of commercial products.
Finally, some reality on Slashdot. This isn't the collective -- it's the real world. Most of what is touted as "successful" free projects are just poorly disguised pirated copies of made-for-profit solutions.
Here in the US we prefer to talk softly and carry a big stick. We haven't had another terrorist attack since 9/11.
Yes, but alas, there's no market for them...
Here's a clue for you: just because someone wants to make a living and get paid for what they do doesn't mean they don't make quality products and love and their work.
Altruism is fine and great, but it doesn't pay the rent/mortgage or pay for the common defense.
Mod the parent up -- a sane opinion on slashdot. Why would anyone take issue with a publisher deciding where and/or when they want to sell their books? Intellectual property (and in this case physical property!) is real and it is perfectly reasonable to want to protect it. If we eliminate intellectual property rights, nothing will be created that's worth a damn.
Ever listened wiki-Pink Floyd?
Thanks for briefly stating your opinion. Some questions/comments:
1) Why is it ironic that the patent was issued on 9/11?
2) Yes, Microsoft and Bill are convicted monopolists. Rather than dispute that (which I could) I will just say that he paid the fine.
3) I support the US patent office and I give Bush a bad name? Huh?
4) Automation of a manual process seems like a reasonable patent to me and the US patent office... Their patent also include preferred embodiments and boundaries. You included a pretty big ellipsis...
That's the beauty of the patent system. If you are too vague, everyone will just invent around it. The less specific your patent is, the less likely it's enforceable.