A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 3rd 13, 08:05 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles

On Sunday, February 3, 2013 1:01:26 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Feb 3, 12:28*pm, bob haller wrote:

On Feb 3, 11:30*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:












bob haller wrote:


On Feb 3, 12:09*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:


bob haller wrote:


On Feb 2, 4:43*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:


bob haller wrote:


On Feb 2, 11:58*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:




Time for you to cut back on the drugs. *You're starting to mistake


your hallucinations for reality.




bogus talking points since *opportunity has operated for 9 years and


22 miles without any on site maintence...




Which is a great description of your position; "bogus talking points".




ISS originally had 3 astronauts when it was brand new, and it took


nearly all of those 3 just to do maintence. Obviously a human rated


station will need lots more service and be far more complex than a


rover.




Because it was UNDER CONSTRUCTION. *As I said earlier, comparing that


to a Mars mission is comparing apples to aardvarks.




Fred your slipping........




Not hardly....




first fred talks of the stations age, now its under construction ......




Bobbert obviously can't even follow his own ramblings. *ISS *is* old.


When it "originally had 3 astronauts when it was brand new" it was


still under construction.




opportunity has traveled 22 miles in 9 years, without any on site


service.




And let's look at this record that Bobbert is touting for his


favourite toaster. *That 22 miles in 9 years amounts to a rate of


advance of a whopping .00028 miles per hour. *A man in a Mars car


could more thoroughly explore that 22 miles in a single day than


Bobbert's toaster has managed in 9 years. *That's a 3285:1 advantage


to man. *NOW run your cost comparisons! *Assume men will have 6 months


on the ground and figure out how many rovers for how many years you


would need to even come close to what they could do.




humans will reqiuire systems under constant repairs and rebuilding.




Why is that? *We can build rovers that require no maintenance for 9


years but the instant people are around everything breaks down all the


time? *You honestly believe that? *REALLY???




Even if you assume a preposterous maintenance burden, there is STILL


that 3285:1 advantage to man. *On a 6 man mission, you could dedicate


2/3 of the available hours to maintenance and STILL get that advantage


over a toaster.




fred maybe the earths nations should cut miitary spending to zero, and


use a fraction of the saved money for space exploration. whats your


thoughts on this




Other than that it's a stupidly unrealistic question, you mean? *If it


was possible I think it would be a wonderful thing. *However, since it


isn't, I think we need to be by far the biggest dog in the forest. *If


we're not, we'll likely get new rulers who won't let idiots like you


bleat about everything. *Then what would you do?




ahh while opportunity took 9 years to travel 9 miles it wasnt just


looking at things, it was doing real science, grinding and sampling


rocks as it went along.




no doubt a rover could be built to travel the same route fast but then


you lose all the detail work.




Unless you had people in it who could look and see interesting things


and stop and knock of a sample.




if you believe its easy to build human rated equiptement that requires


near no service you should be working for nasa designing ISS systems..




I could be, but I don't want to move to Huntsville.




The ONLY human rated system in existence today require constant


maintence.'




Mostly because it's old and wasn't designed to not require it.




While opportunity and the other rovers require no on site maintence at


all, over many years.




You might want to look up the design lifetimes of those things.




While it would be great to have humans on mars for hopefully *more


than flags and footprints......




Since they'll be there 6 months, I suspect they'll be doing more than


that.




Theres no money, theres little or no public support, theres no real


political support, we lack some necessary equiptement, like nuclear


booster to cut travel time, like radiation protection for crews in


deep space....




Nuclear engines aren't required, as you've had repeatedly explained to


you. *As for radiation protection for crews, we invented WATER a long


time ago. *Again, you've had all this explained to you. *You really


need to pull your head out of your ass and stop being so adamantinely


ignorant if you expect people to take anything you say at all


seriously.




basically we lack the basic building blocks to send humans While we


definetely have a great start on robotic planetary exploration....




Basically, you're an ignorant lying ****bag. *There's less support for


your toasters than there is for a manned mission. *If people aren't


going, save the money and stop sending toasters.




--


"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the


*truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *-- Thomas Jefferson




your just a plain idiot.




while chemical propulsion could be used, travel time will be around 6


months each way and mars ground time near 2 years, or thereabouts. or


at best a week, cant do much in a week.




making a total travel time of nearly 3 years, if the crew stays 1.5 to


2 years on ground




crews gone that long, so far from earth are going to have big problems


with both physical and mental condition.. whats the longest time in


space up till now? around a year?




let alone radiation exposure during transit plus on mars. it will be

hard to impossible to treat a mars astronaut who develpos bcancer or

another dreaded disease....



which is another reason to minimize transit time, as much as possible



long travel times increase the chances of mechanical breakdowns

dramatically


You certainly are pessimistic.
  #22  
Old February 3rd 13, 08:37 PM posted to sci.space.history
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles

On Feb 3, 2:05*pm, Dean wrote:
On Sunday, February 3, 2013 1:01:26 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Feb 3, 12:28*pm, bob haller wrote:


On Feb 3, 11:30*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:


bob haller wrote:


On Feb 3, 12:09*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:


bob haller wrote:


On Feb 2, 4:43*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:


bob haller wrote:


On Feb 2, 11:58*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:


Time for you to cut back on the drugs. *You're starting to mistake


your hallucinations for reality.


bogus talking points since *opportunity has operated for 9 years and


22 miles without any on site maintence...


Which is a great description of your position; "bogus talking points".


ISS originally had 3 astronauts when it was brand new, and it took


nearly all of those 3 just to do maintence. Obviously a human rated


station will need lots more service and be far more complex than a


rover.


Because it was UNDER CONSTRUCTION. *As I said earlier, comparing that


to a Mars mission is comparing apples to aardvarks.


Fred your slipping........


Not hardly....


first fred talks of the stations age, now its under construction .....


Bobbert obviously can't even follow his own ramblings. *ISS *is* old.


When it "originally had 3 astronauts when it was brand new" it was


still under construction.


opportunity has traveled 22 miles in 9 years, without any on site


service.


And let's look at this record that Bobbert is touting for his


favourite toaster. *That 22 miles in 9 years amounts to a rate of


advance of a whopping .00028 miles per hour. *A man in a Mars car


could more thoroughly explore that 22 miles in a single day than


Bobbert's toaster has managed in 9 years. *That's a 3285:1 advantage


to man. *NOW run your cost comparisons! *Assume men will have 6 months


on the ground and figure out how many rovers for how many years you


would need to even come close to what they could do.


humans will reqiuire systems under constant repairs and rebuilding.


Why is that? *We can build rovers that require no maintenance for 9


years but the instant people are around everything breaks down all the


time? *You honestly believe that? *REALLY???


Even if you assume a preposterous maintenance burden, there is STILL


that 3285:1 advantage to man. *On a 6 man mission, you could dedicate


2/3 of the available hours to maintenance and STILL get that advantage


over a toaster.


fred maybe the earths nations should cut miitary spending to zero, and


use a fraction of the saved money for space exploration. whats your


thoughts on this


Other than that it's a stupidly unrealistic question, you mean? *If it


was possible I think it would be a wonderful thing. *However, since it


isn't, I think we need to be by far the biggest dog in the forest. *If


we're not, we'll likely get new rulers who won't let idiots like you


bleat about everything. *Then what would you do?


ahh while opportunity took 9 years to travel 9 miles it wasnt just


looking at things, it was doing real science, grinding and sampling


rocks as it went along.


no doubt a rover could be built to travel the same route fast but then


you lose all the detail work.


Unless you had people in it who could look and see interesting things


and stop and knock of a sample.


if you believe its easy to build human rated equiptement that requires


near no service you should be working for nasa designing ISS systems.


I could be, but I don't want to move to Huntsville.


The ONLY human rated system in existence today require constant


maintence.'


Mostly because it's old and wasn't designed to not require it.


While opportunity and the other rovers require no on site maintence at


all, over many years.


You might want to look up the design lifetimes of those things.


While it would be great to have humans on mars for hopefully *more


than flags and footprints......


Since they'll be there 6 months, I suspect they'll be doing more than


that.


Theres no money, theres little or no public support, theres no real


political support, we lack some necessary equiptement, like nuclear


booster to cut travel time, like radiation protection for crews in


deep space....


Nuclear engines aren't required, as you've had repeatedly explained to


you. *As for radiation protection for crews, we invented WATER a long


time ago. *Again, you've had all this explained to you. *You really


need to pull your head out of your ass and stop being so adamantinely


ignorant if you expect people to take anything you say at all


seriously.


basically we lack the basic building blocks to send humans While we


definetely have a great start on robotic planetary exploration....


Basically, you're an ignorant lying ****bag. *There's less support for


your toasters than there is for a manned mission. *If people aren't


going, save the money and stop sending toasters.


--


"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the


*truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *-- Thomas Jefferson


your just a plain idiot.


while chemical propulsion could be used, travel time will be around 6


months each way and mars ground time near 2 years, or thereabouts. or


at best a week, cant do much in a week.


making a total travel time of nearly 3 years, if the crew stays 1.5 to


2 years on ground


crews gone that long, so far from earth are going to have big problems


with both physical and mental condition.. whats the longest time in


space up till now? around a year?


let alone radiation exposure during transit plus on mars. it will be


hard to impossible to treat a mars astronaut who develpos bcancer or


another dreaded disease....


which is another *reason to minimize transit time, as much as possible


long travel times increase the chances of mechanical breakdowns


dramatically


You certainly are pessimistic.


well any system can break down, and with the long travel time and
distance breakdowns of key systems will be a big concern. How many
spare parts do you want to take along?

Plus its not just propulsion breakdowns of concern. its life support
of all types

and exploring mars will be hard if the astronauts are covered with
dirt or in water protective shelters/ mars doesnt have a strong val
allen protective belt like the earth?
  #23  
Old February 3rd 13, 08:39 PM posted to sci.space.history
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles


You certainly are pessimistic.


No I am optimistic that a robotic program can explore mars
affordably In the near term.....

Wheras manned missions are likely 30 years in the future and
probably wouldnt be funded

  #24  
Old February 3rd 13, 09:57 PM posted to sci.space.history
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles

As a historic FACT, theres never been the $$$ spent for manned mars,
however, unmanned robotic mars has had actual missions with real
science returns at a fraction of the costs for any manned
mission......

no one can deny this fact
  #25  
Old February 4th 13, 01:39 AM posted to sci.space.history
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles

On Feb 3, 6:47*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:

As a historic FACT, theres never been the $$$ spent for manned mars,
however, unmanned robotic mars has had actual missions with real
science returns at a fraction of the costs for any manned
mission......


no one can deny this fact


And the FACT is that those toasters are sent as precursors to manned
missions. *If the manned missions aren't to happen, there's no point
in sending the toasters.

There's your FACT.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn


then the history of mars is all talk no action to send people....
  #26  
Old February 4th 13, 04:07 AM posted to sci.space.history
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles

On Feb 3, 9:13*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Feb 3, 6:47*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:


As a historic FACT, theres never been the $$$ spent for manned mars,
however, unmanned robotic mars has had actual missions with real
science returns at a fraction of the costs for any manned
mission......


no one can deny this fact


And the FACT is that those toasters are sent as precursors to manned
missions. *If the manned missions aren't to happen, there's no point
in sending the toasters.


There's your FACT.


then the history of mars is all talk no action to send people....


If we don't carry through with something soon, people are going to
start asking why we're wasting all that money on probes again.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn


probes have gone to pluto, mercury and left the solar system without
any talk of sending astronauts to any of those locations.. so your
again bogus.....

plus it appears spirit and opportunity were GREAT DESIGNS, and since
they dont have to support people they are much less complicated and
that makes them simpler and less likely to break down....

  #27  
Old February 4th 13, 07:56 AM posted to sci.space.history
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles

On Feb 3, 10:34*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Feb 3, 9:13*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Feb 3, 6:47*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:


As a historic FACT, theres never been the $$$ spent for manned mars,
however, unmanned robotic mars has had actual missions with real
science returns at a fraction of the costs for any manned
mission......


no one can deny this fact


And the FACT is that those toasters are sent as precursors to manned
missions. *If the manned missions aren't to happen, there's no point
in sending the toasters.


There's your FACT.


then the history of mars is all talk no action to send people....


If we don't carry through with something soon, people are going to
start asking why we're wasting all that money on probes again.


probes have gone to pluto, mercury and left the solar system without
any talk of sending astronauts to any of those locations.. so your
again bogus.....


And how many are going now, Bobbert? *And just what kind of 'probes'.
All toasters are not created equal, you know.



plus it appears *spirit and opportunity were GREAT DESIGNS, and since
they dont have to support people they are much less complicated and
that makes them simpler and less likely to break down....


And means they do much, MUCH less than a man could.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn


I kinda doubt many humans would be willing to go on a slow one way
trip out of the solar system.

But hey feel free to volunteer.......
  #28  
Old February 4th 13, 04:03 PM posted to sci.space.history
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles

my point which you ignore lots of probes have gone many places where
there are no plans to send humans, like pluto, mercury, venus, saturn,
and ut of the soar system.

fred you bogusly claim the only reason to send missions are if humans
will follow.

that statement is purely false

------------------------------------------------------- fred bogusly
claims
And the FACT is that those toasters are sent as precursors to manned
missions. If the manned missions aren't to happen, there's no point
in sending the toasters.

There's your FACT
-----------------------------------------------------------




  #29  
Old February 4th 13, 05:03 PM posted to sci.space.history
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 790
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles


"bob haller" wrote in message
...

On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Fevric J. Glandules" wrote:





Rick Jones wrote:


I want to see boots on Martian ground in my lifetime (boots with human
feet in them, with the rest of the human there in a suit as well...)


+1


but I am curious about how much it costs to put a rover on Mars for
weeks versus a human geologist for a day. Lets say it takes three
weeks to do with a rover what a human geologist could do in a day. Is
getting a human geologist to Mars (and I presume back again) more or
less than 21X the cost of a rover mission?


The same question that came to *my* mind.


Viking cost about a billion 1970s dollars - adjusted, that's more
than Curiosity [1], I believe.


Apollo ran to ~24 billion 1969 dollars.


Surveyor cost half a billion.


So manned:moon seems to be about 20/30 times more expensive than
unmanned:mars. I'd guess that manned:mars would be an order of
magnitude more expensive than unmanned:mars.


Put it this way: for the cost of a manned Mars mission, you could
put a *lot* of rovers up there.


[1] Other data:
Spirit & Opportunity cost about a billion USD.
Curiosity about 2.8 billion.


The number you pulled out of your ass for the difference in
productivity between a man on the scene and a remote rover is WAY too
low.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn


well humans must eat sleep, bathe, care for themselves, have
recreation, and all the other things that must be done on a personal
level...... plus they will have to do maintence and repairs of their
suits, habitat, and everything else to stay alive.......


And on the flip side, pretty much EVERY rover movement has to be planned
days in advance and takes hours.

So yeah, the rover is THERE, but not doing much.


what the number of productive science hours per ISS resident? I have
never seen a published number just that its low, because of al the
must do chores....


Well, you haven't looked at the URLs that folks, including myself have given
you.

And honestly, I'm tired of spoon-feeding you information.



now compare that with rovers, that can run 24 / 7 given operators to
supervise from earth.....


But, no, they can. They take a team hours or even days to plan movements.
It's not like a guy sitting on Earth zooming a rover around with a joystick.



with a proper nuke power pack they can work day and nite, and theres
no concern of humans contaminating mars, sterlize everything before
shipment......


Well, considering they don't sterilize everything now...



the best part of this? the artificial intelligence of robots can be
advanced a lot, useful for back on earth.


No, that's the WORST part of it.

You want to advance AI, do it here on Earth. You have FAR more limited
capabilities millions of miles away.

Heck, while I wouldn't call it "AI" RPI just received an updated "Watson".
It takes up a small room. But luckily just has to be shipped upstate a 100
miles or so. You can't just ship a new computer to your rovers on Mars.

soon the US will be again competive in manufacturing by using robotics
to assemble products, eventually entire plants with few workers,
mostly maintence people to care for equiptement.

the days of Whipple Manufacturing are nearly here........



--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

  #30  
Old February 4th 13, 05:10 PM posted to sci.space.history
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 790
Default Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles

"bob haller" wrote in message
...

a flyng service vehicle for mars rovers might be a good investment.


Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


Number 29 just turned over, geez those college drivers. send the flyer
to put it upright, and while were there clean the solar panels....

Rovers could collect rock samples depositing them in known spots for
later transit to earth or ISS


Yes, this is in NASA's long range planning. They keep pushing it back.

Note that the amount of rocks returned will be less than the mass of an
astronaut. i.e. not much.

And then you have to hope that between the rovers and the controllers back
home, we get a good sample.

Now, compare this to the Apollo 15? episode of FTETM where the astronauts
are trained to gather a good sample of rocks. Within an hour or two,
astronauts with training can probably return a FAR better sample of rocks
than a series of rovers could in months.

And note that this was mission that found the Genesis Rock.

Remember, QUALITY is far more important that QUANTITY.



--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity, now in its seventh yearon Mars, has a new capability Sam Wormley[_2_] Amateur Astronomy 1 March 24th 10 04:30 AM
? I traveled INFINITE miles by car this year ( 2009 ). Semmalon Misc 1 January 8th 10 10:14 AM
I traveled INFINITE miles by car this year ( 2009 ). Semmalon Misc 0 January 1st 10 01:21 PM
I traveled INFINITE miles by car this year ( 2009 ). Semmalon Misc 0 January 1st 10 01:17 PM
Opportunity on Mars Lawrence Sayre Amateur Astronomy 3 January 25th 04 08:40 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.