If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Hundreds of NASA employees allowed farewell photos with Shuttle before they get laid off. Suck it, America   (news.blogs.cnn.com) divider line 341
    More: Florida, space shuttles, NASA, Kennedy Space Center, Space Shuttle Discovery, space program, shuttle, SpaceX, service module  
•       •       •

19000 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Sep 2010 at 1:05 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



341 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-09-23 09:26:30 AM
Oznog: There were PEOPLE sent to the MOON in 1969-1972.
Cars wouldn't be running on fuel injection for another ~25 years.


Except that they already had been, for at least 12 years (new window).
 
2010-09-23 09:26:30 AM
ZeroCorpse: and is made of mostly-useless minerals which we have in abundance on Earth.


Actually it has a lot of useful materials that are in abundance on Earth, but would be really costly to get into space. A proper moon base could manufacture rocket fuel and some spaceship components which can then be shot into space or earth orbit at a fraction of the cost compared to earth-bound launches.

Naturally this requires a massive up-front investment, but if the human species is to ever become a serious space-fairing one, it is an important step to take.


Wolverines: I know, right? All it did was fly people into farking space, launch satellites, telescopes and conduct research. Farking joke.

Feynman had some interesting things to say about the Shuttle. I dunno if I'd call it a joke - more like "goddamn miracle."


Oznog: Build the Space Elevator NOW!!

I wish! Not only would it make putting stuff in space cheaper and easier, but think of the possibilities for opening up exploration of other worlds: Bring a space elevator kit with you and deploy it from orbit then ride it down. Also solves a huge chunk of the "how do we get back" problem.

We probably already have materials strong enough to do this on worlds with lower gravity, like various moons in our solar system (including our own).
=Smidge=
 
2010-09-23 09:26:32 AM
JohnnyC 2010-09-23 04:30:44 AM
powhound: Bush wanted to expand NASA, head to MARS. Government funded.

But decided attacking Iraq was more important.

1) False dichotomy - It's not an either / or.
2) Lie - Bush did not cancel the program to launch (pun) the war.


// I don't like bush either, just don't blame him for things that are not his fault (there's plenty to put on his shoulders already)
 
2010-09-23 09:28:15 AM
Ron T Davenport: Shuttle astronauts have seen UFO's while in orbit.

True fact.


This afternoon I saw a UFO. Odds are it was a bird, though.
 
2010-09-23 09:29:20 AM
abfalter: ZeroCorpse: Oh, please. Spare me the melodrama.

While it's unfortunate that a bunch of people will lose their jobs, I hardly think NASA employees will have a hard time finding work.


Yes, they will. There are not a lot of jobs out there right now, even for talented people.

Our President has gutted out space program. I'll never forgive myself for voting Democrat the first time when I cast my vote for him. (OK, the alternative was Sarah Palin.... ...I should have just not voted...)


Obama didn't gut the space program, you twit.
 
2010-09-23 09:30:23 AM
StradivariusBone: When the next generation lifter (Ares I) begins with the stupidest premise in space history by proposing to put humans on a solid rocket, it deserves to be canceled.

When that same rocket costs the same to do a sub-orbital "test flight" as a commercial company (SpaceX) spends to develop and fly 3 engines, 2 rockets, a capsule and 2 launch sites then that rocket deserves to be canceled.

Solid rockets are way more cost effective than their liquid fueled cousins, artard.


Cheaper, but you can't control the burn. As soon as they ignite, you can't shut them off. Cheaper, but more dangerous (Challenger). I would rather use solid rockets for a heavy lift booster, and keep controlable, liquid fueled stacks for manned flight.
 
2010-09-23 09:30:25 AM
Without a modern propulsion system nobody is going any further than the moon. We just need to learn how to bend the fabric of space and time to create a wormhole. From there it's just a hop skip and a jump to wherever we want to go. The ET's figured this out long ago, came here and now live in undersea bases all over the globe.

It can be done. Just ask them.
www.streaming-madness.net
i.ytimg.com
 
2010-09-23 09:33:01 AM
ZeroCorpse: cyclebiff: Welcome to Obama's America.

It's libtards that have made this possible -- George Bush sought to put humans on Mars, while Obama does NOTHING.

What's the point to going to Mars. What do you intend we do once we get there?

We can't breathe there. We can't mine the planet as travel back and forth takes too long to be worth the minerals. We can't set up shop there because it's a hostile environment. There's really nothing on Mars worth sticking around for, and the cost of setting up a base on Mars is ridiculously oppressive.

Honestly: WHAT THE HELL IS THE POINT OF GOING TO MARS!?!?

Is it just for bragging rights! Is it to satisfy your need for the world to seem more "futuristic"? What do you hope to gain from a manned mission to Mars?

Space is empty, and vast, and because of the frailties of our species will will never be able to reach another planet capable of supporting our kind of life. Reality isn't like Star Trek or Star Wars. We're not going to be setting up a galactic empire. If we make it to Mars, we'll look around, say, "Yep, it's an inhospitable shiathole, just like we thought!" and we'll head back to Earth to study rocks for another 30 years.

There's nothing on Mars.


I respectfully disagree with your opinion. What if thousands of years ago, our ancestors in Africa said, "There is nothing to the North". Then, a couple hundred years ago, our European ancestors said, "There is nothing to the west". Now you say that there is nothing on Mars. That may be literally true, as no mineral or element on Mars is anything that we as a society need to survive or advance, but it's a stepping stone that will lead to something much greater someday. We won't be alive to see it, but the possibilities are vast. Saying we will never have the means to travel to another hospitable planet is terribly closed minded. I'd hate to have that little faith in humanity.
 
2010-09-23 09:34:48 AM
Smidge204: Oznog: Build the Space Elevator NOW!!

I wish! Not only would it make putting stuff in space cheaper and easier, but think of the possibilities for opening up exploration of other worlds: Bring a space elevator kit with you and deploy it from orbit then ride it down. Also solves a huge chunk of the "how do we get back" problem.


The concept of a space elevator is so far into science fiction that we are more likely to get robots that transform into jet packs and blast us to the moon. It is like the M.C. Escher drawing of space concepts.
 
X15
2010-09-23 09:35:00 AM
StradivariusBone: When the next generation lifter (Ares I) begins with the stupidest premise in space history by proposing to put humans on a solid rocket, it deserves to be canceled.

When that same rocket costs the same to do a sub-orbital "test flight" as a commercial company (SpaceX) spends to develop and fly 3 engines, 2 rockets, a capsule and 2 launch sites then that rocket deserves to be canceled.

Solid rockets are way more cost effective than their liquid fueled cousins, artard.


A billion dollars per shot is cheap now?

Just who's the retard here?

To be fair, Ares I is not exactly a sterling case for solids, but the Russians are the kings of cheap, and the only solids they use are surplus ICBMs.
 
2010-09-23 09:35:08 AM
TaxiDriver: The whole maned travel to mars thing was a scam that only Bush could propose. It is impractical to get that much supplies into mars orbit. That is supplies for 3 men, lander supplies for surface exploration, supplies for the 6 mo trip home, fuel to burn out of mars orbit. And it would take HUGE amounts of fuel (meaning more weight to get into mars orbit) to get a 3 man apollo sized capsule slowed enough to get into earth orbit from mars.

I'll bet it would be a lot easier if you launced from... oh, let's say some sort of MOONBASE!
but yeah, there's no good reason to go there anymore. sheesh.
 
2010-09-23 09:35:58 AM
haddie: Ron T Davenport: Shuttle astronauts have seen UFO's while in orbit.

True fact.

This afternoon I saw a UFO. Odds are it was a bird, though.



But there aren't any birds... in space!
 
2010-09-23 09:36:20 AM
One small step for man. One giant leap for Chinamankind.
 
2010-09-23 09:38:12 AM
Luminaro: ZeroCorpse: cyclebiff: Welcome to Obama's America.

It's libtards that have made this possible -- George Bush sought to put humans on Mars, while Obama does NOTHING.

What's the point to going to Mars. What do you intend we do once we get there?

We can't breathe there. We can't mine the planet as travel back and forth takes too long to be worth the minerals. We can't set up shop there because it's a hostile environment. There's really nothing on Mars worth sticking around for, and the cost of setting up a base on Mars is ridiculously oppressive.

Honestly: WHAT THE HELL IS THE POINT OF GOING TO MARS!?!?

Is it just for bragging rights! Is it to satisfy your need for the world to seem more "futuristic"? What do you hope to gain from a manned mission to Mars?

Space is empty, and vast, and because of the frailties of our species will will never be able to reach another planet capable of supporting our kind of life. Reality isn't like Star Trek or Star Wars. We're not going to be setting up a galactic empire. If we make it to Mars, we'll look around, say, "Yep, it's an inhospitable shiathole, just like we thought!" and we'll head back to Earth to study rocks for another 30 years.

There's nothing on Mars.

I respectfully disagree with your opinion. What if thousands of years ago, our ancestors in Africa said, "There is nothing to the North". Then, a couple hundred years ago, our European ancestors said, "There is nothing to the west". Now you say that there is nothing on Mars. That may be literally true, as no mineral or element on Mars is anything that we as a society need to survive or advance, but it's a stepping stone that will lead to something much greater someday. We won't be alive to see it, but the possibilities are vast. Saying we will never have the means to travel to another hospitable planet is terribly closed minded. I'd hate to have that little faith in humanity.


If Mars once had life on it then it may be a giant oil balloon! That's why Bush wanted to go there and start a war!

\\I agree that we should continue space exploration but manned missions are too risky and expensive. We can do more with robotics and probes.
 
2010-09-23 09:39:58 AM
schattenteufel: haddie: Ron T Davenport: Shuttle astronauts have seen UFO's while in orbit.

True fact.

This afternoon I saw a UFO. Odds are it was a bird, though.


But there aren't any birds... in space!


2.bp.blogspot.com

A bird can dream.
 
2010-09-23 09:40:11 AM
Red Shirt Blues: My crappy picture from the last night launch. Got a gold pass from a cousin. I think that puts you about three miles away.

It's amazing to think there are people sitting on top of that fireball.

The space program will come back with a vengeance. We are too curious as a species to not explore outside our current limitations. We will leave this solar system some day. Too bad we won't be around to see it though.

I hope my year and a half old son will be able to one day walk on the moon. Or at the very least my grandson.
 
2010-09-23 09:40:43 AM
FuturePastNow: "over 8,000 NASA workers who could see their jobs eliminated as the last shuttle launches in February 2011"

We'll never have a manned space program again. Oh, we'll rent Soyuz capsules to transport astronauts to and from the ISS for another decade. But it's over. The people who make it work are gone and they won't be back.


There was a BIG gap between the last Apollo mission (including Skylab) and the first shuttle mission. Just because a single program stops doesn't mean we're never going back to space. Expect a big gap, but they'll be back.
 
2010-09-23 09:42:26 AM
haddie: Ron T Davenport: Shuttle astronauts have seen UFO's while in orbit.

True fact.

This afternoon I saw a UFO. Odds are it was a bird, though.


Link (new window)
 
2010-09-23 09:45:13 AM
Ron T Davenport: Link (new window)

You've got to be kidding me.
 
2010-09-23 09:45:44 AM
Ron T Davenport: haddie: Ron T Davenport: Shuttle astronauts have seen UFO's while in orbit.

True fact.

This afternoon I saw a UFO. Odds are it was a bird, though.

Link (new window)


Yup, that's definitely unidentified.
 
2010-09-23 09:48:56 AM
bulldg4life: FuturePastNow: We'll never have a manned space program again.

With the free market, the private sector will pick up the slack.


WHAT free market?

Oh, I get it, that is sarcasm. Sorry, Comrade, it's early.
 
2010-09-23 09:50:17 AM
Everybody knows somebody like this, he spends an assload of money keeping his old piece of shiat running, when he could just give it up and buy a new car for less in the long run. But he's always saying that all the payments he's making to various places (repair shops and such) is draining his account so he can't afford a new car.

Face it, the shuttles are old and shiatty.
On the face of it, it looks like a step backwards, but I don't think so.

What will really kick space exploration into high gear is finding evidence of life on other planets. Or something amazing shot by stuff like this. (new window)
 
2010-09-23 09:52:16 AM
FuturePastNow: We'll never have a manned space program again. Oh, we'll rent Soyuz capsules to transport astronauts to and from the ISS for another decade. But it's over. The people who make it work are gone and they won't be back.

Sadly there's some truth to this.

There's not enough people left who really knows Apollo intimately end to end. From the Saturn V to the lander. Documentation is patchy thanks to years of shuffling around. Even restoring stuff is complicated thanks to this. We couldn't replicate it today without redoing lots of the research that was done generations ago and relearning what they already knew. Presumably could be done faster with computers and machinery available now... but it's still depressing to think about.

Could we build another shuttle? I doubt it. Private sector won't take the cost or risk. Public just doesn't have the backing.

The Chinese saw this trend 10 years ago when they started to get serious about building a space program. They are still very immature, but they are ramping up very quickly. Give them another 10 years and they could very likely be leading. They are rather efficient, have good engineering capabilities, materials, money, and could replace the US and Russia in this regard.

India? Their space program is a joke. Same goes for the EU. Just marking their territory, not very serious. Japan? On the fence about them. They *could* get very serious very quickly. They have immense knowledge and technical capabilities, but limited budget right now. If they put money behind it, or partnered with another country (Russia perhaps)... that would be a powerhouse.

The US messed up in the Clinton/Bush years by not pushing forward with a clear mission for NASA and a next-gen spacecraft (Bush made an effort, but was late and never really backed it). We're now going to need to live with not having superiority in space for both scientific and military concerns.
 
2010-09-23 09:53:13 AM
Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: bulldg4life: With the free market, the private sector will pick up the slack.

What little private investment there is in space research has stood on the shoulders of public research. If we had waited around for the private sector to start investing in space research, we wouldn't have put someone on the moon, developed sophisticated satellite technology, or reaped any of the great benefits of our space research. If we wait for them to continue to invest, we'll lag far behind since corporations invest the lion's share of their money in things that are easily monetized while the vast majority of space research has no opportunity for immediate profit.

THE PRIVATE SECTOR IS NOT THE ANSWER TO EVERY FARKING PROBLEM.


Particularly when the "solutions" are co-opted by The State and tax and other laws create an economic atmosphere that precludes such answers.

Oops! Little Johnny swallowed some ant poison! Quick, here, give him some bleach! That will counter the ant poison! (Liberal LogicTM)
 
2010-09-23 09:54:19 AM
haddie: Ron T Davenport: Link (new window)

You've got to be kidding me.


Why the hate? People with small closed minds will never expand our knowledge. Study everything. Leave no stone unturned. If you believe we're the only living thing in the universe you will never get anywhere and life as we know it will never evolve and eventually stagnate. Is it really that hard to believe a higher intelligence monitors our planet? If we were a million years more advanced than we are now, we would do it. Hell we would simply invade the place and put up a US flag.
 
2010-09-23 09:54:49 AM
While the space shuttle program is outdated, Obama has officially killed the space program. All of these people were to be shifted to constellation and the moon landing. The whole point of the moon "base" was a launching point for Mars.

Obama has no vision for the space program. He effectively killed it while flying Buzz Aldrin around on AF1.

This is a sad day in America. The sole reason I will vote against Obama in the next election is his piss poor handling of our future in space. A man without vision does not deserve the oval office.

Fark Obama.
 
2010-09-23 09:56:37 AM
@cyclebiff: Suck it cyclebiff, suck it long and suck it hard.
 
2010-09-23 09:56:46 AM
Carl Sagan's Cosmos (new window)
/Like a Mote of Dust, In the Morning Sky.
 
2010-09-23 09:57:36 AM
enforcerpsu: While the space shuttle program is outdated, Obama has officially killed the space program. All of these people were to be shifted to constellation and the moon landing. The whole point of the moon "base" was a launching point for Mars.

Obama has no vision for the space program. He effectively killed it while flying Buzz Aldrin around on AF1.

This is a sad day in America. The sole reason I will vote against Obama in the next election is his piss poor handling of our future in space. A man without vision does not deserve the oval office.

Fark Obama.


Obama is as useless as tits on a fish. He has done NOTHING in almost 2 years except take this country backwards. Honestly, from what I can tell the only thing he has done is go on a hell of a lot of vacations and spend a shiatload of taxpayers money. At least Bush vacationed in Texas. Obama globetrots all over the planet and calls them 'vacations'. This guy is a complete and useless assclown.
 
2010-09-23 09:58:39 AM
pup.socket:

The government isn't an answer to all problems.


Go wash your mouth out with soap!
 
2010-09-23 10:00:20 AM
Ron T Davenport: People with small closed minds will never expand our knowledge. Study everything.

Studying the UFO you just presented shows it to be quite obviously space debris. Open your mind too far and all the knowledge dribbles out. Generally, truth is not found at a post at Loch Ness looking out for bigfoot and his Yeti cousin.

I'm fairly certain there is other life. Mathematically, it just makes sense. However, it coming to earth seems, given all the evidence, outrageous.
 
2010-09-23 10:01:06 AM
Ron T Davenport: Is it really that hard to believe a higher intelligence monitors our planet?

Yes. Yes it is.
 
2010-09-23 10:02:11 AM
haddie: Ron T Davenport: People with small closed minds will never expand our knowledge. Study everything.

Studying the UFO you just presented shows it to be quite obviously space debris. Open your mind too far and all the knowledge dribbles out. Generally, truth is not found at a post at Loch Ness looking out for bigfoot and his Yeti cousin.

I'm fairly certain there is other life. Mathematically, it just makes sense. However, it coming to earth seems, given all the evidence, outrageous.


Quite obviously space debris that stop and changes direction and speeds up to what one doctor says was over 2,500 mph and over 100 g's? We should harness that debris technology, not ignore it.
 
2010-09-23 10:03:56 AM
de_Selby: Blaxabbath: As sure as I am that many of those positions were a result of bureaucratic bloat, I'm still saddened -- as an American and a human -- to see us removing ourselves from so much research and exploration.

A few points/questions, if anyone could comment.

1) I wonder how much this will really save us in the long run. I mean, to start these kinds of programs back up again in the future seems like it will require a pretty massive capital reinvestment. Or has this just been the long-term goal of the space program and now it is simply in a planned lull until other breakthroughs are first accomplished?

2) I, obviously, don't know a lot about NASA's progress in reaching Mars and beyond -- but they always at least seemed to be moving in the right direction. If you were to ask me who is on the right track (in general): DHS, SEC, the Pentagon (with it's decades of funding fighter jets that will never come to fruition), whoever was supposed to be monitoring this Deepwater Horizon business, or NASA, I would tell you NASA, without a doubt. Cutting NASA now seems like the federal equivalent of cutting firefighters and police officers before local governments will touch their pet social programs.

3) What does this show children about the importance of learning math and science (haven't we supposed to have been working on this for a few decades now)? Billion dollar bailouts to smooth talkers on Wall Street with political connections. Millionaire athletes/musicians/performers (and, no, I am not one to argue with what these people make). Cutting of NASA -- NASA! The face of science, technological advancement, and discovery to America's youth. We will gladly back off the spending for science and knowledge (as well as the American pride we all have in our history of space exploration) but we will never touch the defense budget.

Business is business but how much more short sighted are our politicians going to get?

A long time ago Spinoza noted that if people are not free to do science, the liberty of the nation falls apart.

This is pretty much what the right-wing has tried to ensure in America. Science has become unbelievably politicized (global warming, stem-cell research, evolution ...), and science education so undervalued.

Meanwhile, Philadelphia is consumed with the question of the starting quarterback, and the rest of America with celebrity judges.

Panem et circensis.

Too drunk to conclude


And too drunk to make sense.
 
2010-09-23 10:04:50 AM
smedrick: Ron T Davenport: Is it really that hard to believe a higher intelligence monitors our planet?

Yes. Yes it is.


I almost feel bad for you. Almost.
The truth is out there.
Link (new window)
 
2010-09-23 10:05:22 AM
Ron T Davenport: enforcerpsu: While the space shuttle program is outdated, Obama has officially killed the space program. All of these people were to be shifted to constellation and the moon landing. The whole point of the moon "base" was a launching point for Mars.

Obama has no vision for the space program. He effectively killed it while flying Buzz Aldrin around on AF1.

This is a sad day in America. The sole reason I will vote against Obama in the next election is his piss poor handling of our future in space. A man without vision does not deserve the oval office.

Fark Obama.

Obama is as useless as tits on a fish. He has done NOTHING in almost 2 years except take this country backwards. Honestly, from what I can tell the only thing he has done is go on a hell of a lot of vacations and spend a shiatload of taxpayers money. At least Bush vacationed in Texas. Obama globetrots all over the planet and calls them 'vacations'. This guy is a complete and useless assclown.


http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/president-obamas-vacation-days/

Although, to be fair, they left out the vacation Obama took on Mars with the ambassadors from Alpha Centauri.
 
2010-09-23 10:07:54 AM
Ron T Davenport: Quite obviously space debris that stop and changes direction and speeds up to what one doctor says was over 2,500 mph and over 100 g's? We should harness that debris technology, not ignore it.

That's assuming the debris was the size of an alien spacecraft, instead of the size of, well, space debris.
 
2010-09-23 10:09:04 AM
smedrick: .

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/president-obamas-vacation-days/

Although, to be fair, they left out the vacation Obama took on Mars with the ambassadors from Alpha Centauri.


An entire month in just the first year alone. Good thing everyone is gainfully employed and the budget is under control. I mean what else is there for him to do? You go Barry.
 
2010-09-23 10:09:39 AM
Ron T Davenport:
Quite obviously space debris that stop and changes direction and speeds up to what one doctor says was over 2,500 mph and over 100 g's? We should harness that debris technology, not ignore it.


"What one doctor says".

Please provide the scientific backing for the distance of the debris from the shuttle to prove said speeds. Or, alternatively, quote the expert (who studies space debris for a living) presented in the video who claimed that it was perfectly reasonable action for debris blown by an engine.

You know "open your mind".

Alien life forms came in something that appears to be the size of a tin can, waved to our camera, and then ran away without indicating their presence. And, if you are to believe "UFOlogists", they have been playing this game of cat and mouse for as long as we've been recording documentation, but are yet to reveal themselves to anyone who can take a photo that isn't blurry or out of focus. William of Ockham is spinning in his grave.

Never mind the fact that all of our recording information has shown no indication of foreign objects projecting discernible radio, microwave, or any other information our way. OPEN YOUR MIND apparently means "ignore facts for science fiction".

Have you ever thought about getting your thetans tested?
 
2010-09-23 10:10:52 AM
smedrick: Ron T Davenport: Quite obviously space debris that stop and changes direction and speeds up to what one doctor says was over 2,500 mph and over 100 g's? We should harness that debris technology, not ignore it.

That's assuming the debris was the size of an alien spacecraft, instead of the size of, well, space debris.


I'll take the word of a professional with a lot of letters after his last name that studied the footage for over two years over the word of someone posting on a time-killing Interweb board but that's just me.
 
2010-09-23 10:13:23 AM
Gyrfalcon: Well, the Teahadists should be happy.

This is going to cut government spending by a fair amount. And also reduce the overall size of a very large government agency.

High fives all around!


ARE YOU FARKING KIDDING ME?
 
2010-09-23 10:13:49 AM
GleeUnit: I have a good buddy who works as a composites engineer at SpaceX. Trust me, there is no shortage of private sector interest in space exploration.

/CSB


I wonder what exciting things they'll discover in their exploration of low Earth orbit?
 
2010-09-23 10:14:08 AM
Ron T Davenport: smedrick: Ron T Davenport: Quite obviously space debris that stop and changes direction and speeds up to what one doctor says was over 2,500 mph and over 100 g's? We should harness that debris technology, not ignore it.

That's assuming the debris was the size of an alien spacecraft, instead of the size of, well, space debris.

I'll take the word of a professional with a lot of letters after his last name that studied the footage for over two years over the word of someone posting on a time-killing Interweb board but that's just me.


So you agree that Galileo was wrong?
 
2010-09-23 10:14:16 AM
haddie:

Never mind the fact that all of our recording information has shown no indication of foreign objects projecting discernible radio, microwave, or any other information our way. OPEN YOUR MIND apparently means "ignore facts for science fiction".


Yes because any civilization that has mastered time and space, can travel across galaxies, withstand flight that would pulverize a human and have overcome the laws of physics and gravity would most certainly be transmitting microwaves and broadcasting an AM radio call-in talk show for us to communicate with them.
 
2010-09-23 10:14:27 AM
I'd argue that it's vastly better to spend billions having people fly in space than it is to spend billions on redundant military activity. It sets a better example for kids and even keeps a lot of the same contractors happy.
 
2010-09-23 10:15:25 AM
Ron T Davenport: smedrick: Ron T Davenport: Quite obviously space debris that stop and changes direction and speeds up to what one doctor says was over 2,500 mph and over 100 g's? We should harness that debris technology, not ignore it.

That's assuming the debris was the size of an alien spacecraft, instead of the size of, well, space debris.

I'll take the word of a professional with a lot of letters after his last name that studied the footage for over two years over the word of someone posting on a time-killing Interweb board but that's just me.


I try to keep an open mind and not just subscribe to one man's view on some sketchy internet video.

A bunch of letters after your name doesn't necessarily make you an expert on grainy video of space debris, btw.
 
2010-09-23 10:18:10 AM
Ron T Davenport:
Yes because any civilization that has mastered time and space, can travel across galaxies, withstand flight that would pulverize a human and have overcome the laws of physics and gravity would most certainly be transmitting microwaves and broadcasting an AM radio call-in talk show for us to communicate with them.


Right. It makes sense they'd come in all stealthy, see a shuttle, and shiat their pants and leave. That's the logical thought process. Leaving no traces of anything so much as a signal on ANY wavelength humans can determine. That's logical.

Yeah. Knowledge. You've got it all right.
 
2010-09-23 10:21:09 AM
trappedspirit: GleeUnit: I have a good buddy who works as a composites engineer at SpaceX. Trust me, there is no shortage of private sector interest in space exploration.

/CSB

----

I wonder what exciting things they'll discover in their exploration of low Earth orbit?


----

How to make money without screwing the taxpayer.
 
2010-09-23 10:23:08 AM
haddie: The concept of a space elevator is so far into science fiction that we are more likely to get robots that transform into jet packs and blast us to the moon. It is like the M.C. Escher drawing of space concepts.


The only technology we don't have to make it happen is a material with a high enough strength/weight ratio for the main cable, but we're getting closer every year.

Everything else is engineering and logistics. The physics involved can be found in any college freshman textbook. The concept is dead simple and many of the supposed problems have had workable remedies proposed. The financial and logistical advantages are enormous.



Ron T Davenport: Without a modern propulsion system nobody is going any further than the moon.

VASIMR - Earth to Mars in 7 weeks:

regmedia.co.uk
=Smidge=
 
2010-09-23 10:23:52 AM
X15: SpaceX has already proven that they can do things a lot cheaper than NASA can. United Launch Alliance has a long history of being cheaper, and Boeing is looking for the opportunity to prove that it too can be cheaper without NASA getting in the way.

ULA and Boeing already do work for NASA and the military. Like SpaceX they say they can do things cheaper for a manned exploration program, but we have yet to see the product in action.
Its not a claim you take at face value when the winner is likely to walk away with a near exclusive contract for a multi billion dollar a year program that could span the next three decades.

SpaceX itself has one successful launch of a ten ton lifter (which was supposed to stay in orbit a year according to its controllers... oops). They have a ways to go before we know its not a "you get what you pay for" situation.

So far as the NASA budget increase, a chunk of that money is earmarked for termination of the shuttle and fixing the presidents internet.
Its not proof that they have any more a clue of where we're going now than they did last year (or the year before...).
 
Displayed 50 of 341 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report