|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
"Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy
mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash on the moon’s surface." See: http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...crashing-end-3 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Friday, December 14, 2012 8:20:35 AM UTC-8, wrote:
"Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash on the moon’s surface." See: http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...crashing-end-3 Actually they were taking out a Nazi moon base ;-) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Dec 14, 8:20*am, wrote:
"Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash on the moon’s surface." See: http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...g-mission-to-c... Because their scheduled orbital decay has not the option of sufficient retro-thrust nor fuel for any actual slowing down before impact (as any true fly-by-rocket lander would have to have), instead they’ll simply impact at roughly 1.35 km/sec. http://now.msn.com/nasa-probe-will-crash-into-moon “Is this NASA meets Jackass? The space agency will deliberately crash two probes into the moon on Monday, hitting the rim of a lunar crater at over 3,000mph.” http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”,GuthVenus “GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in question: https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...18595926178146 http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth# |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Dec 15, 10:18*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 14, 8:20*am, wrote: "Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash on the moon’s surface." See: http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...g-mission-to-c... Because their scheduled orbital decay has not the option of sufficient retro-thrust nor fuel for any actual slowing down before impact (as any true fly-by-rocket lander would have to have), instead they’ll simply impact at roughly 1.35 km/sec. *http://now.msn.com/nasa-probe-will-crash-into-moon *“Is this NASA meets Jackass? The space agency will deliberately crash two probes into the moon on Monday, hitting the rim of a lunar crater at over 3,000mph.” *http://translate.google.com/# *Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”,GuthVenus *“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in question: *https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...Guth#slideshow.... *http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif *https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth# it makes sense to do the crash...... its mission and extended mission are complete no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual crashes it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and damage apollo or other legacy sites |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Dec 15, 12:18*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Dec 15, 10:18*am, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 14, 8:20*am, wrote: "Twin NASA robotic spacecraft conclude a lengthy mission to map the moon’s gravity and investigate what might be found below the lunar crust. Nearly out of fuel, the two ships will be directed to crash on the moon’s surface." See: http://news.msn.com/science-technolo...g-mission-to-c.... Because their scheduled orbital decay has not the option of sufficient retro-thrust nor fuel for any actual slowing down before impact (as any true fly-by-rocket lander would have to have), instead they’ll simply impact at roughly 1.35 km/sec. *http://now.msn.com/nasa-probe-will-crash-into-moon *“Is this NASA meets Jackass? The space agency will deliberately crash two probes into the moon on Monday, hitting the rim of a lunar crater at over 3,000mph.” *http://translate.google.com/# *Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”,GuthVenus *“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in question: *https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...Guth#slideshow... *http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif *https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth# it makes sense to do the crash...... its mission and extended mission are complete no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual crashes it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and damage apollo or other legacy sites Since they still have no viable prototype fly-by-rocket landers for any pilots to gain their first-hand expertise at being dropped from a jet cargo transport at 20,000' (or even from a controlled helicopter deployed drop) and then purely via retro-thrust managing to controllably downrange and safely soft-land, is perhaps why they'll need all the new downrange and crash data they can possibly get. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: it makes sense to do the crash...... its mission and extended mission are complete no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual crashes You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following... it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and damage apollo or other legacy sites So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion possibility? *Really? Really. It is a legitimate reason |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Dec 15, 5:25*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Me wrote: On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: it makes sense to do the crash...... its mission and extended mission are complete no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual crashes You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following... it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and damage apollo or other legacy sites So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion possibility? *Really? Really. *It is a legitimate reason Really. *Look at the odds. *It's not. And if that 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance happens and it DOES hit one of them, where's the down side? -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar *territory." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn On Friday, thrusters on each satellite will fire to guide the spacecraft toward the unnamed mountain. The maneuver will also ensure the satellites avoid striking landing sites from the Apollo, Surveyor and Soviet space programs. Engineers calculated there was a 1- in-125,000 chance the satellites would hit one of the heritage landing sites, according to David Lehman, GRAIL project manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory someday in the future space archealogists may want to visit those landing sites for research purposes. no matter what ebb and flow are going to crash into the moon. there isnt fuel to prevent it..... at least this way they get some science out of it... and prevent possible damage to historic sites |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Dec 15, 8:13*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: On Dec 15, 5:25*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: Me wrote: On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: it makes sense to do the crash...... its mission and extended mission are complete no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual crashes You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following... it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and damage apollo or other legacy sites So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion possibility? *Really? Really. *It is a legitimate reason Really. *Look at the odds. *It's not. And if that 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance happens and it DOES hit one of them, where's the down side? On Friday, thrusters on each satellite will fire to guide the spacecraft toward the unnamed mountain. The maneuver will also ensure the satellites avoid striking landing sites from the Apollo, Surveyor and Soviet space programs. Engineers calculated there was a 1- in-125,000 chance the satellites would hit one of the heritage landing sites, according to David Lehman, GRAIL project manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory I'm sorry, but that's an insane set of probabilities! *I don't believe it. someday in the future space archealogists may want to visit those landing sites for research purposes. Why? *We know more about them than could ever be discerned by visiting them. no matter what ebb and flow are going to crash into the moon. there isnt fuel to prevent it..... Well, you finally got something right. at least this way they get some science out of it... And that's a decent reason. ...and prevent possible damage to historic sites And that makes no sense whatsoever. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar *territory." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn Fred no doubt you would like indenpendence hall in philadephia to be demolished for condos....... you have no sense of history |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Dec 15, 4:56*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Dec 15, 5:25*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: Me wrote: On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: it makes sense to do the crash...... its mission and extended mission are complete no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual crashes You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following... it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and damage apollo or other legacy sites So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion possibility? *Really? Really. *It is a legitimate reason Really. *Look at the odds. *It's not. And if that 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance happens and it DOES hit one of them, where's the down side? -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar *territory." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn On Friday, thrusters on each satellite will fire to guide the spacecraft toward the unnamed mountain. The maneuver will also ensure the satellites avoid striking landing sites from the Apollo, Surveyor and Soviet space programs. Engineers calculated there was a 1- in-125,000 chance the satellites would hit one of the heritage landing sites, according to David Lehman, GRAIL project manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory someday in the future space archealogists may want to visit those landing sites for research purposes. no matter what ebb and flow are going to crash into the moon. there isnt fuel to prevent it..... at least this way they get some science out of it... and prevent possible damage to historic sites Any true lunar surface obtained science would be rather nice for a change, being that so little had been accomplished by the entire Apollo era. Of course closed-door science that is derived from nondisclosure technology and only that as having been interpreted from those with having the most vested interest in sustaining their supposed history and its substantial cold-war legacy of perks, benefits and subsequent authority that could otherwise be put at risk, and especially if they actually had to offer those actual fly-by-rocket landers as scaled to commercially suit that'll work perfectly first time out of the box, and as equally piloted without a hitch by those as having never actually performed any one-on-one piloting of a fly-by-rocket craft with such a variable CG, as for safely downrange and accomplishing their soft controlled landings as first time at the controls of such a poorly documented spacecraft with hardly any computer, as well as having no momentum reaction gyros and only a very limited supply of fuel, is still going to be a very impressive trick. So, the more we can learn about the retro-thrust energy required to pull out of orbit, downrange and manage to soft land whatever craft without a hitch, regardless of whatever gets compromised by what those local mascons might contribute, the better. Because somehow our Apollo era did manage to accomplishing everything, and then some, which is an extremely important realization if we’re ever going to commercially exploit whatever our naked and physically dark moon has to offer. http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”,GuthVenus “GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in question: https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...18595926178146 http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth# |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
NASA moon-mapping mission to come to a crashing end
On Dec 16, 3:20*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: On Dec 15, 8:13*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: On Dec 15, 5:25*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: Me wrote: On Dec 15, 4:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: it makes sense to do the crash...... its mission and extended mission are complete no doubt they will have equiptement looking for water after the dual crashes You were doing so well. *Then you had to say the following... it elminates the possiblity a later uncontrolled crash could hit and damage apollo or other legacy sites So they're avoiding a one in Lord knows how many quadrillion possibility? *Really? Really. *It is a legitimate reason Really. *Look at the odds. *It's not. And if that 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance happens and it DOES hit one of them, where's the down side? On Friday, thrusters on each satellite will fire to guide the spacecraft toward the unnamed mountain. The maneuver will also ensure the satellites avoid striking landing sites from the Apollo, Surveyor and Soviet space programs. Engineers calculated there was a 1- in-125,000 chance the satellites would hit one of the heritage landing sites, according to David Lehman, GRAIL project manager at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory I'm sorry, but that's an insane set of probabilities! *I don't believe it. someday in the future space archealogists may want to visit those landing sites for research purposes. Why? *We know more about them than could ever be discerned by visiting them. no matter what ebb and flow are going to crash into the moon. there isnt fuel to prevent it..... Well, you finally got something right. at least this way they get some science out of it... And that's a decent reason. ...and prevent possible damage to historic sites And that makes no sense whatsoever. Fred no doubt you would like indenpendence hall in philadephia to be demolished for condos....... Bobbert, you making up silly **** and then proclaiming it's my opinion doesn't change my opinion. *It merely makes you look like a delusional halfwit. you have no sense of history And you have no sense. *Period. It goes with your inability to read simple English sentences, I suppose. -- "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is *only stupid." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine fred i find it amazing that you hold a paying job, I pity your co workers if you act in real life anything like you do here....... most companies weed out offensive people since its bad for worker morale.... in addition your a very closed mind kinda person, which must add to defense spending costs..... imagine what our world could accomplish if all we had were police, and fighting between nations and terrorists ended....... it would put you out of work.... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA Lunar Mission Successfully Enters Moon Orbit (LRO) | ron | News | 0 | June 24th 09 01:03 AM |
........Nasa/Griffin LYING about Public Support for Moon/Mars Mission! | jonathan | Space Station | 0 | September 28th 06 04:20 AM |
News: Nasa moon mission could include UK astronaut | Rusty | History | 14 | May 2nd 06 10:40 AM |
Laser Altimeter Mapping the moon question | John Stoffel | Technology | 3 | January 29th 06 02:33 AM |
NASA selects Moon mapper for mission of opportunity | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | February 2nd 05 08:38 PM |