NASA too afraid to name JWST costs

On 16/07/2011 12:34 AM, Kulin Remailer wrote:


You're nothing but a coward

On Jul 15, 10:55*am, Alan Erskine wrote:
On 16/07/2011 12:34 AM, Kulin Remailer wrote:

You're nothing but a coward

name anything nasa is doing well..........

make a list check it twice, sadly it will be short to non existent

On 16/07/2011 1:23 AM, bob haller wrote:
On Jul 15, 10:55 am, Alan wrote:
On 16/07/2011 12:34 AM, Kulin Remailer wrote:

You're nothing but a coward

name anything nasa is doing well..........

make a list check it twice, sadly it will be short to non existent

S/H/it is a coward because s/h/it is using a remailer - anonymous.

bob haller wrote:

name anything nasa is doing well..........

The vast majority of the unmanned interplanetary probes. Looking at the
projects funded by NASA it will be easy to come up with a very long list
of lesser known aviation projects.

On Jul 15, 2:56*pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:
bob haller wrote:

name anything nasa is doing well..........

The vast majority of the unmanned interplanetary probes. *Looking at the
projects funded by NASA it will be easy to come up with a very long list
of lesser known aviation projects.

sorry currently doing well.......

bob haller wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:
bob haller wrote:

name anything nasa is doing well..........

The vast majority of the unmanned interplanetary probes. *Looking at the
projects funded by NASA it will be easy to come up with a very long list
of lesser known aviation projects.

sorry currently doing well.......

Do you have any idea how many unmanned space probes are out and about
right now? Clearly not.

On Jul 16, 2:31*am, Doug Freyburger wrote:
bob haller wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:
bob haller wrote:

name anything nasa is doing well..........

The vast majority of the unmanned interplanetary probes. *Looking at the
projects funded by NASA it will be easy to come up with a very long list
of lesser known aviation projects.

sorry currently doing well.......

Do you have any idea how many unmanned space probes are out and about
right now? *Clearly not.

how many has nasa launched in the last 5 years?

you really cant count the old ones which nasa built so long ago to
very high standards.....

like stuff everywhere the old models were built to be high quality and
really over designed.

newer products are built to a price point to maximise profit....
without regard to life, quality, dependability, etc etc

judging by the RTG this situation has now reached nasas interplanetary
probe mentality.

most amazing is not only are we now building crap but posters here
want to send crap that at best will be semi functional on its way. go
fever it must launch yeah its not working well but it will be fine
dont worry about it

spirit and opportunity were a notable exception,,,,,

but nasa tossed away the design that worked so well

bob haller wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:

Do you have any idea how many unmanned space probes are out and about
right now? *Clearly not.

how many has nasa launched in the last 5 years?

You select a time span that can not work for most space shots. It's a
clever trick to appeal to the irrational. Use the ones launched in the
last 10 years because that's how interplanetary trajectories work.

you really cant count the old ones which nasa built so long ago to
very high standards.....

Agreed. Pioneer 5 orbiting the Sun sending solar wind data for 30+
years should not be counted. Nor Explorer 1/2 nor Galileo nor Casani.

like stuff everywhere the old models were built to be high quality and
really over designed.

That still leaves probes in orbit around Mercury, Venus and Mars, probes
using ion drives to manuever around the asteriod belt and intercept
comets, probes that delibertely crashed on the Moon to find water,
probes outside of the range of lunar orbit doing space observations.
The list does go on and on like that many getting almost no publicity.

Plus since this thread is about a space telescope and I'm extremely
biased because the first IRAS InfraRed Astronomy Satellite is where I
started my career by doing ground link software - There have been a list
of very successful telescope-like satellites over the years. The new
ones in the infrared series are designed for a service life with liquid
helium doing high resolution then a service life without liquid helium
doing low resolution. Behind me there's an IBEX poster about observing
neutral atoms that originate at the solar wind edge - Intersteller
Boundary EXperiment. There are Xray and gamma array observatories.

That list also goes on and on like that. You won't count Huble because
it was launched long ago. Agreed. There are plenty of newer
observatories that aren't as well known doing very excellent work.

On Jul 16, 5:27*am, bob haller wrote:
On Jul 16, 2:31*am, Doug Freyburger wrote:

bob haller wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:
bob haller wrote:

name anything nasa is doing well..........

The vast majority of the unmanned interplanetary probes. *Looking at the
projects funded by NASA it will be easy to come up with a very long list
of lesser known aviation projects.

sorry currently doing well.......

Do you have any idea how many unmanned space probes are out and about
right now? *Clearly not.

how many has nasa launched in the last 5 years?

you really cant count the old ones which nasa built so long ago to
very high standards.....

like stuff everywhere the old models were built to be high quality and
really over designed.

newer products are built to a price point to maximise profit....
without regard to life, quality, dependability, etc etc

judging by the RTG this situation has now reached nasas interplanetary
probe mentality.

most amazing is not only are we now building crap but posters here
want to send crap that at best will be semi functional on its way. go
fever it must launch yeah its not working well but it will be fine
dont worry about it

spirit and opportunity were a notable exception,,,,,

but nasa tossed away the design that worked so well

Gah, how did you escape from the kill file? You're sick Haller. You
need help.
-Mike