SS1 flight set for June 21

In article ,
Joe Strout wrote:

In article ,
Joe Strout wrote:

Hot damn! The X-Prize will be won in less than three weeks. This will
be a historic occasion.

Correction: they won't be quite winning the X-Prize on June 21; to do
that, they have to fly twice in two weeks. But I think we're all agreed
that this will be pretty much a formality after the 100 km flight.

Best,
- Joe


Actually, no. They have to do it with triple the payload: three people,
not just one pilot. And they have to do it again within two weeks, not
a month or two (or three) between each flight.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Joe Strout wrote:

In article ,
Joe Strout wrote:

Hot damn! The X-Prize will be won in less than three weeks. This
will
be a historic occasion.

Correction: they won't be quite winning the X-Prize on June 21; to do
that, they have to fly twice in two weeks. But I think we're all agreed
that this will be pretty much a formality after the 100 km flight.

Best,
- Joe


Actually, no. They have to do it with triple the payload: three people,
not just one pilot. And they have to do it again within two weeks, not
a month or two (or three) between each flight.

No, they have to do it with the MASS of 3 people, but it only requires one
actual person.



--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

In article ,
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote:

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in message
...

Actually, no. They have to do it with triple the payload: three people,
not just one pilot. And they have to do it again within two weeks, not
a month or two (or three) between each flight.

No, they have to do it with the MASS of 3 people, but it only requires one
actual person.


As I pointed out in response to Christopher Jones, that's an example of
form-over-substance.

If you're going to water down the requirements so far, why bother with
one person at all? Why not just track down Ham's great-grandkid and let
him or her duplicate the flight of his ancestor? Bah.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Herb Schaltegger wrote:



If you're going to water down the requirements so far, why bother with
one person at all? Why not just track down Ham's great-grandkid and let
him or her duplicate the flight of his ancestor? Bah.


As you can see, all great minds think alike...and Pat's Space Monkey
Supply Services is ready to meet your Space Simian needs 24/7! Monkeys
of all sizes, sexes, colors, and temperaments- you show us a rocket, and
we'll show you a monkey that will fit it! Be it Gibbon or Gorilla,
Squirrel or Spider, Baboon or Barbary Ape, we're the boys you're looking
for....why launch a man when you can launch a Mandrill with half the
funds.....and have double the fun?
They're _all_ cute... and once we start encouraging them to board your
rocket with our electric monkey prods, they will all become
personality-filled to a degree that will truly surprise you! :-)
Pat

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

If you're going to water down the requirements so far, why bother with
one person at all? Why not just track down Ham's great-grandkid and let
him or her duplicate the flight of his ancestor? Bah.

Because it's part of the Ham family wisdom that you never *EVER* let people
start strapping you into things.

--
A man can always find a pub.

In article _eszc.1373$0l3.30@newsfe4-gui,
Mary Pegg wrote:

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

If you're going to water down the requirements so far, why bother with
one person at all? Why not just track down Ham's great-grandkid and let
him or her duplicate the flight of his ancestor? Bah.

Because it's part of the Ham family wisdom that you never *EVER* let people
start strapping you into things.

(Jeez, a little behind on our usenet reading, are we?)

Anyway, ask Pat Flannery to pull out his post describing an alleged
siting of Ham and Wally in a bar sometime . . . funniest thing I've read
in years.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

Anyway, ask Pat Flannery to pull out his post describing an alleged
siting of Ham and Wally in a bar sometime . . . funniest thing I've read
in years.


I take it you mean this:

ed kyle wrote:

Mercury capsule No. 5 was
overaccelerated to 5,857 mph, reaching an altitude of 157 miles and
landing 422 miles downrange. After more than two hours, recovery
crews rescued Ham in good condition from a capsule that had begun to
take on water.

That depends on how you define "good condition"- the chimp was outraged
over the malfunction of his Pavlovian conditioned "see the light- pull
the correct lever- get a banana pellet; see the light- pull the wrong
lever- get an electric shock" control panel, which was giving him shocks
for doing the right thing; as well as the 15 G's he pulled during
reentry after the escape system fired, and all that bobbing around in
the ocean...from what I've read, the thing that came out of the
recovered capsule resembled a wolverine as far as attitude went; and
such bad temper wasn't seen on the part of an astronaut again until
Wally Schirra in Apollo 7. It is rumored that they were later seen in a
bar together, tossing back boilermakers and cursing the names of Pavlov,
Kranz, Tarzan, von Braun, and Slayton....while hurling cold pills,
banana pellets, and feces at the other patrons.

Pat


During the Google search for this, I came to the horrible realization
that I had actually got drunk enough once that
I posted the lyrics to my little Irish ditty, "The Pecker-Touching Song"
to the newsgroup....for this I beg forgiveness. :-[

Pat

In article ,
Pat Flannery wrote:

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

Anyway, ask Pat Flannery to pull out his post describing an alleged
siting of Ham and Wally in a bar sometime . . . funniest thing I've read
in years.


I take it you mean this:

ed kyle wrote:

Mercury capsule No. 5 was
overaccelerated to 5,857 mph, reaching an altitude of 157 miles and
landing 422 miles downrange. After more than two hours, recovery
crews rescued Ham in good condition from a capsule that had begun to
take on water.

That depends on how you define "good condition"- the chimp was outraged
over the malfunction of his Pavlovian conditioned "see the light- pull
the correct lever- get a banana pellet; see the light- pull the wrong
lever- get an electric shock" control panel, which was giving him shocks
for doing the right thing; as well as the 15 G's he pulled during
reentry after the escape system fired, and all that bobbing around in
the ocean...from what I've read, the thing that came out of the
recovered capsule resembled a wolverine as far as attitude went; and
such bad temper wasn't seen on the part of an astronaut again until
Wally Schirra in Apollo 7. It is rumored that they were later seen in a
bar together, tossing back boilermakers and cursing the names of Pavlov,
Kranz, Tarzan, von Braun, and Slayton....while hurling cold pills,
banana pellets, and feces at the other patrons.

Pat


During the Google search for this, I came to the horrible realization
that I had actually got drunk enough once that
I posted the lyrics to my little Irish ditty, "The Pecker-Touching Song"
to the newsgroup....for this I beg forgiveness. :-[

Pat

Yep, that's the one. And, just for the reference to "The
Pecker-Touching Song", I declined to trim much of my quotes . . . :-p

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

In article _eszc.1373$0l3.30@newsfe4-gui,
Mary Pegg wrote:

Because it's part of the Ham family wisdom that you never *EVER* let
people start strapping you into things.

(Jeez, a little behind on our usenet reading, are we?)

In this group, for sure.

Anyway, ask Pat Flannery to pull out his post describing an alleged
siting of Ham and Wally in a bar sometime . . . funniest thing I've read
in years.

Yup, it was a dim memory of that post that prompted my comment above.

--
A man can always find a pub.

Herb Schaltegger wrote:
Actually, no. They have to do it with triple the payload: three people,
not just one pilot. And they have to do it again within two weeks, not
a month or two (or three) between each flight.

Nope. They only have to demonstrate the payload and
volume, they need only one person to actually make the
flights. They can do a "how many people can fit in
the phonebooth" ground test and carry sand bags to 100 km.