"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in
message ...
"jonathan" wrote in message
...

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in
message ...
This has been debunked already.

I believe the X-33 was cancelled for political purposes, to allow
Lockheed
et al to replace it with a long term very expensive moon shot.
Bush and Lockheed have been sleeping with each other since
Bush was a governor. I don't trust the decision to cancel the
X-33 at all, it smells.

Do you still believe in Santa Claus?

Also, please do not post articles in their entirety, it violates
copyright law.

I keep hearing this, but it's just not true in this context.
Unless I go out and make money somehow with that article
there's nothing wrong with using it in usenet conversations.


Yes there is.

This is speech, not broadcasting.

The US Supreme Court was very clear on that in their historic
decision
which defined the legal character of the internet. In Reno v ACLU,
the
court ruled that as the most mass participatory communication medium
known, internet conversations deserved the very highest level of
First Amendment protection.

While that may be true, it does not protect wholesale copying of
material from other sources.

Usenet speech has the highest protection of all.

This conversation, in the US, is no different than two people
talking in their living rooms or in the public square.
Copyright law does not apply in the least.

For non-commercial speech, essentially anything found
on the internet is already in the public domain.

Again, you're completely misreading the court's decision here.
In fact I'm not even sure how you can get to here from the decision.

It's up
to the owner of the material to protect it behind a
credit card site etc. But if they publish it out on the net
any usenet speaker can repost it as they please.
--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

wrote in message
...
source:
http://www.space-travel.com/reports/...d_Not_999.html

If X-20 had actually flown in the late 1960s, that instrumentation
would have supplied the Shuttle's designers with a priceless data
base. They would not have been forced to rely completely on wind-
tunnel data and primitive computer models and would have produced a
better design. For instance, the Orbiters carry two tons of lead
blocks in their noses to compensate for an error in aerodynamic
models, and X-20 data might well have prevented this mistake.

It is even possible that X-20 would have convinced NASA and USAF
management that a winged vehicle was the wrong way to go - that the
operational problems and parasitic weight were just too crippling
to
be worth the supposed advantages of high cross-range capability and
runway landing.

Many people came to realize this unpleasant truth during the test
flights of Columbia in 1981-82, by which time it was politically
impossible to abandon the Shuttle or cut it back to an X-program.
Since then, spaceplanes have been rejected in favor of
semi-ballistic
capsules every time they have competed for the same mission, most
recently in the Hermes/ARD, Kliper/ACTS, and OSP/Orion programs.

So this is my own alternate aerospace history fantasy: If there had
been a few X-20 flights, and the data base from these flights had
been
available in 1971, it is possible that we could have avoided the
whole
Space Shuttle fiasco? Might we have stuck with capsules instead of
getting lost in a blind alley? Could Dyna-Soar have saved us 14
dead
astronauts and over $100B of wasted money? Could we have spent the
last 35 years doing something useful in space, if that useless
little
black spaceplane had actually flown?
--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

I thought the large discussion was a useful piece of work. It wanted
documentation -- pointers to resources that backup what is said and
provide good reason to believe it -- but where someone has done a good
and useful job it's nice to find it here. In ascii yet, like real text.
So I'd like to encourage and see the author build a site to carry his
very rich materials in hand. Both because they are immediately valuable
and useful to workers in the field, but also because things people know
are evanescent -- when the person goes, unless they are put out
somewhere, they are lost.

Yes, criticism offers to some people a method to feel superior. I think
that sort of stuff is just a social pollution and is best ignored.

Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 Dec 10]