|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
... It's is bloody difficult to hide a launch. It's doubly bloody difficult to hide a satellite in orbit in a way that it cannot possibly be tracked (neither optically nor by radar). It's triply difficult to hide a satellite reentering and landing because it makes a huge fracking ionization trail as it reenters. Manned "black ops" in orbit is pure fiction. I have wondered about this. What's harder to hide? The launch phase or the re-entry? I'm guessing the re-entry. I suppose it may be possible to have an entirely black program, but the operational constraints would be huge. You'd probably have to launch from some place like Kwajalein Atoll and then start re-entry someplace way out over the Pacific and come in on a descending leg from the NW to SE to stay out over uninhabited areas as much as possible. This means landing at like Tierra del Fuego. And then of course shipping stuff back to Kwajalein Atoll. Just not practical or at all likely. Jeff -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
On Jun 27, 9:03*am, "Greg \(Strider\) Moore"
wrote: "Jeff Findley" *wrote in message ... It's is bloody difficult to hide a launch. *It's doubly bloody difficult to hide a satellite in orbit in a way that it cannot possibly be tracked (neither optically nor by radar). *It's triply difficult to hide a satellite reentering and landing because it makes a huge fracking ionization trail as it reenters. Manned "black ops" in orbit is pure fiction. I have wondered about this. *What's harder to hide? *The launch phase or the re-entry? I'm guessing the re-entry. I suppose it may be possible to have an entirely black program, but the operational constraints would be huge. You'd probably have to launch from some place like Kwajalein Atoll and then start re-entry someplace way out over the Pacific and come in on a descending leg from the NW to SE to stay out over uninhabited areas as much as possible. *This means landing at like Tierra del Fuego. *And then of course shipping stuff back to Kwajalein Atoll. Just not practical or at all likely. Jeff -- Greg D. Moore * * * * * * * * *http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses.http://www.quicr.net a mini space plane could be launched by a larger carrier aircraft, and return to a air strip somewhere |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
In sci.space.policy "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote:
I have wondered about this. What's harder to hide? The launch phase or the re-entry? I'm guessing the re-entry. I suppose it may be possible to have an entirely black program, but the operational constraints would be huge. You'd probably have to launch from some place like Kwajalein Atoll and then start re-entry someplace way out over the Pacific and come in on a descending leg from the NW to SE to stay out over uninhabited areas as much as possible. This means landing at like Tierra del Fuego. And then of course shipping stuff back to Kwajalein Atoll. How easy is it to distinguish between the re-entry of a space vehicle and the entry into the atmosphere of a meteor? Even out over the Pacific there are still ships and planes yes? rick jones -- Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought. 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... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
Rick Jones wrote:
Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote: I have wondered about this. What's harder to hide? The launch phase or the re-entry? I'm guessing the re-entry. Because the decelleration phase of the reentry lasts longer. Correct. Probably. The acceleration at launch is limited by the power of the rockets, which are made to accelerate unmanned spacecraft rapidly. The decelleration on renetry is limited by friction with the air so it can last a lot longer. I'm not sure the larger size at launch time is a big enough difference to matter. There's a huge ion cloud trailing behind a reentering object and that's visible on radar. At launch the rocket gets as high as it can as fast as it can to avoid generating a large ion cloud. I suppose it may be possible to have an entirely black program, but the operational constraints would be huge. You'd probably have to launch from some place like Kwajalein Atoll and then start re-entry someplace way out over the Pacific and come in on a descending leg from the NW to SE to stay out over uninhabited areas as much as possible. This means landing at like Tierra del Fuego. And then of course shipping stuff back to Kwajalein Atoll. Launch at noon so the flight from the rocket matters less. Ooops, except it's the infrared from the heat of the rocket that's detected. Launching in summer just doesn't matter on that scale. How easy is it to distinguish between the re-entry of a space vehicle and the entry into the atmosphere of a meteor? Even out over the Pacific there are still ships and planes yes? There's no reasonable way for a meteor to be going slower than escape velocity. There's no reasonable way for almost any spacecraft to come in near escape velocity. Once the velocity of the object is measured, it's easy to tell. Before the velocity is measured, it's hard to tell. It can happen that a meteor explodes with a bang near nuclear range before anyone notices the track. Big reaction by everyone. Woe unto the world if that happens over Moscow or Washington some day. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
On Jun 29, 1:19*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: On Jun 27, 9:03*am, "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote: "Jeff Findley" *wrote in message ... It's is bloody difficult to hide a launch. *It's doubly bloody difficult to hide a satellite in orbit in a way that it cannot possibly be tracked (neither optically nor by radar). *It's triply difficult to hide a satellite reentering and landing because it makes a huge fracking ionization trail as it reenters. Manned "black ops" in orbit is pure fiction. I have wondered about this. *What's harder to hide? *The launch phase or the re-entry? I'm guessing the re-entry. I suppose it may be possible to have an entirely black program, but the operational constraints would be huge. You'd probably have to launch from some place like Kwajalein Atoll and then start re-entry someplace way out over the Pacific and come in on a descending leg from the NW to SE to stay out over uninhabited areas as much as possible. *This means landing at like Tierra del Fuego. *And then of course shipping stuff back to Kwajalein Atoll. Just not practical or at all likely. Jeff a mini space plane could be launched by a larger carrier aircraft, Not if it was going to actually go into space, unless it is a VERY mini space plane. and return to a air strip somewhere It still has to boost up and reenter down. *That stuff is pretty obvious, what with the bright lights and such. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar *territory." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn sats are made to be invisible or at least hard to detect..... air launched by a carrier aircraft would appear for most of its flight as just another plane flying around.. military probably has a way to mask a incoming something. stealth aircraft are common knowledge |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
How Life on Mars Will Be Revealed by Curiosity
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 08:39:50 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote: bob haller wrote: On Jun 29, 1:19*am, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: On Jun 27, 9:03*am, "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote: "Jeff Findley" *wrote in message ... It's is bloody difficult to hide a launch. *It's doubly bloody difficult to hide a satellite in orbit in a way that it cannot possibly be tracked (neither optically nor by radar). *It's triply difficult to hide a satellite reentering and landing because it makes a huge fracking ionization trail as it reenters. Manned "black ops" in orbit is pure fiction. I have wondered about this. *What's harder to hide? *The launch phase or the re-entry? I'm guessing the re-entry. I suppose it may be possible to have an entirely black program, but the operational constraints would be huge. You'd probably have to launch from some place like Kwajalein Atoll and then start re-entry someplace way out over the Pacific and come in on a descending leg from the NW to SE to stay out over uninhabited areas as much as possible. *This means landing at like Tierra del Fuego. *And then of course shipping stuff back to Kwajalein Atoll. Just not practical or at all likely. Jeff a mini space plane could be launched by a larger carrier aircraft, Not if it was going to actually go into space, unless it is a VERY mini space plane. and return to a air strip somewhere It still has to boost up and reenter down. *That stuff is pretty obvious, what with the bright lights and such. sats are made to be invisible or at least hard to detect..... Utter bull****. Well, not entirely. There are reports of some efforts to make satellites hard to spot, both from "inside sources say..." and from amateur observers. I think the satellite launched by STS-28 Columbia was said to be such a design. However, it is very rare. air launched by a carrier aircraft would appear for most of its flight as just another plane flying around.. And then it becomes a really ****ing bright flame that triggers every bird looking down with something like IONDS. You can't do 'secret launches'. military probably has a way to mask a incoming something. Utter poppycock! Learn some physics, you ignorant ****. stealth aircraft are common knowledge Yeah, and stealth aircraft don't fly at Mach 15+ and leave a ****ing huge bright streak from their plasma sheath across hundreds or thousands of miles of sky. Again, learn some physics. Well, I think Bob is way off base with his "secret manned space program" nonsense, because it is just too expensive for whatever value it could conceivably offer. But we need to be careful in dismissing it outright. We still don't know what was causing all those Shuttle-like sonic booms heard in Southern California in the 1990s, remember. At the time, "Aurora" was all the rage, but it now seems pretty clear Aurora was just a code name for B-2 funding. But if the "Aurora" SR-71 successor wasn't behind all those odd sightings and sonic booms, what was? And then there is Aviation Week's cover story about "Blackstar". So Bob's daydreams of secret military astronauts is probably way off in science fiction territory, but saying "you can't hide a launch" is going a bit too far. You probably *could* hide both a launch and a re-entry, at least from the public (and there's no guarantee Russia or China would report it publicly, they may not want us to know that they know). A Pegasus-like launch from Kwajalein could be conducted with hardly anyone in the public knowing about it. Kodiak Island wouldn't be much harder to conceal. A re-entry coming up over the south and central Pacifc and crossing the California coast at high altitude to land at Creech AFB would not be easily noticed by the public, especially in the middle of the night (the visible plasma trail ends hundreds of miles offshore.) It would probably make a noise, like a sonic boom, but... oh wait, there WERE lots of unexplained sonic booms... But a launch of something big enough to carry crews? No, that would be too much to conceal for long. Brian |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Curiosity | Brian Gaff | Space Shuttle | 6 | May 3rd 12 01:40 PM |
Mars rover Curiosity set for Saturday launch | [email protected] | Policy | 21 | December 5th 11 07:08 AM |
Mars Roover Curiosity already crippled before launch | [email protected] | Policy | 41 | July 17th 11 08:21 PM |
Astronomy + Curiosity = Discovery ! | Painius | Misc | 0 | April 19th 06 09:16 AM |
Curiosity: What would Mars moon Phobos look like from the martian surface? | Glenn Mulno | Amateur Astronomy | 8 | March 25th 04 07:11 PM |