NASA did a No-no

Used a Boeing-developed aluminum alloy on the Shuttle ET without giving
Boeing any royalties for its use; now owes Boeing big time:
http://blog.al.com/breaking/2009/04/...ay_boeing.html

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
Used a Boeing-developed aluminum alloy on the Shuttle ET without giving Boeing
any royalties for its use; now owes Boeing big time:
http://blog.al.com/breaking/2009/04/...ay_boeing.html



Just like the NBA, home field is everything.

...."A Washington state federal judge has sided with Boeing..."

See what happens in ...eh hum...federal court.




Pat

In sci.space.history Jonathan wrote:
Just like the NBA, home field is everything.

..."A Washington state federal judge has sided with Boeing..."

See what happens in ...eh hum...federal court.

I parsed "Washington state federal judge" as implying the verdict was
returned in federal court in the state of Washington. Further
bolstered by another quote from the article:


" Federal Claims Judge Francis M. Allegra said Wednesday Boeing was
entitled to a 1.25% royalty on the cost of the tanks"

Now, there may still be some degree of home field advantage, but I
suspect it was somewhat minimal. This entry:

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/francis-m-allegra

shows he was born in Ohio.

rick jones
--
The computing industry isn't as much a game of "Follow The Leader" as
it is one of "Ring Around the Rosy" or perhaps "Duck Duck Goose."
- Rick Jones
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

"Rick Jones" wrote in message
...
In sci.space.history Jonathan wrote:
Just like the NBA, home field is everything.

..."A Washington state federal judge has sided with Boeing..."

See what happens in ...eh hum...federal court.

I parsed "Washington state federal judge" as implying the verdict was
returned in federal court in the state of Washington. Further
bolstered by another quote from the article:


" Federal Claims Judge Francis M. Allegra said Wednesday Boeing was
entitled to a 1.25% royalty on the cost of the tanks"

Now, there may still be some degree of home field advantage, but I
suspect it was somewhat minimal. This entry:

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/francis-m-allegra

shows he was born in Ohio.


Those lighter tanks due to their alloy ended up being the
last straw for the Shuttle, as the thinner tanks required
......thicker insulation.

And shouldn't Boeing be suing Lockheed?




rick jones
--
The computing industry isn't as much a game of "Follow The Leader" as
it is one of "Ring Around the Rosy" or perhaps "Duck Duck Goose."
- Rick Jones
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

Rick Jones wrote:
I parsed "Washington state federal judge" as implying the verdict was
returned in federal court in the state of Washington. Further
bolstered by another quote from the article:


What I get a kick out of is that Boeing was going to sue Lockheed over
all this, and Lockheed passed it all over to NASA. :-D

Pat

"Jonathan" wrote in message
...


Those lighter tanks due to their alloy ended up being the
last straw for the Shuttle, as the thinner tanks required
.....thicker insulation.

Umm, that's a new one on me. Any proof?

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
Those lighter tanks due to their alloy ended up being the
last straw for the Shuttle, as the thinner tanks required
.....thicker insulation.
Umm, that's a new one on me. Any proof?

Given the high thermal conductivity of aluminum in any thickness, and
the time before launch that the LH2 and LOX are loaded into the ET, you
could make the ET out of 3" thick aluminum alloy and have no difference
in the insulation requirements at all
to prevent ice buildup.

Pat

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message
m...
"Jonathan" wrote in message
...


Those lighter tanks due to their alloy ended up being the
last straw for the Shuttle, as the thinner tanks required
.....thicker insulation.

Umm, that's a new one on me. Any proof?

According to Aero news anyways

'The lighter-weight external tanks proved problematic for the
space agency. The thinner alloy required larger amounts of
insulating foam to be attached to the outer skin of the tanks...
which led to the risk for larger sections "shedding" off the
tanks during launch."

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?C...8-1def681ba20e



--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
"Jonathan" wrote in message
...


Those lighter tanks due to their alloy ended up being the
last straw for the Shuttle, as the thinner tanks required
.....thicker insulation.

Umm, that's a new one on me. Any proof?
Also, please explain to me how a posting that went to sci.space.history
alone takes longer to show up on my newsgroup subscription service than
one that went to both sci.space.history and sci.space.policy.
This explains a lot about your and Derek's postings suddenly appearing
in increasing numbers in sci.space.history and sci.space.policy since
you took over the moderation of sci.space.tech, doesn't it?
....you've figured out a stealth way to get any reply to one of your
non-sci.space.tech postings to first go through you before it goes to
any other newsgroups you posted it to, even though it won't appear as a
posting to sci.space.tech.
That's pretty slick.
Also pretty dishonest and sucky.

Pat

This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.