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

Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM had been onthe surface



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 31st 13, 04:50 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:

In article ,


says...
















On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:




ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best




to not attempt recovery of their body?




the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the




coast......




but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long




ago in very deep water?




Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.




It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.




Jeff


--


"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would


magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper


than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in


and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer




really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or

second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys

who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....

Jesus, Bob! You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?
  #22  
Old February 1st 13, 02:01 PM posted to sci.space.history
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:
On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:


In article ,


says...


On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best


to not attempt recovery of their body?


the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the


coast......


but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long


ago in very deep water?


Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.


It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.


Jeff


--


"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would


magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper


than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in


and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer


really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or


second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys


who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....


Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?


well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,
should the crew be told?

say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry
if nasa was certain of their dying?
  #23  
Old February 1st 13, 03:00 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Feb 1, 5:01*am, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:









On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:


In article ,


says...


On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best


to not attempt recovery of their body?


the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the


coast......


but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long


ago in very deep water?


Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.


It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.


Jeff


--


"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would


magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper


than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in


and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer


really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or


second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys


who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....


Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?


well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,
should the crew be told?

say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry
if nasa was certain of their dying?


Should they have been told about the Phantom Works of TRW/Raytheon and
Boeing testing out their nifty ABL capability of targeting an incoming
LEO item, from an operationally cloaked altitude of 40,000+ feet?

http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices...ips/index.html
http://www.lb.boeing.com/defense-spa...N_ABL_074.html
http://www.gizmag.com/boeing-airborn...missile/12567/
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread298256/pg1

BP Deep Horizon helipad platform hole:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/0...-scene-photos/
http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/924...orm990x669.jpg
  #24  
Old February 1st 13, 03:03 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Friday, February 1, 2013 8:01:31 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:

On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:




In article ,




says...




On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:




ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best




to not attempt recovery of their body?




the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the




coast......




but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long




ago in very deep water?




Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.




It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.




Jeff




--




"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would




magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper




than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in




and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer




really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or




second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys




who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....




Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?




well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,

should the crew be told?



say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry

if nasa was certain of their dying?


I have no doubt that NASA would tell a crew just that. Those crews know very well the risks involved.

As for Columbia, if NASA knew, do you really think they would have let them re-enter?
  #25  
Old February 1st 13, 03:06 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Friday, February 1, 2013 9:00:00 AM UTC-5, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 1, 5:01*am, bob haller wrote:

On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:




















On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:




In article ,




says...




On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:




ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best




to not attempt recovery of their body?




the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the




coast......




but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long




ago in very deep water?




Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.




It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.




Jeff




--




"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would




magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper




than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in




and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer




really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or




second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys




who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....




Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?




well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,


should the crew be told?




say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry


if nasa was certain of their dying?




Should they have been told about the Phantom Works of TRW/Raytheon and

Boeing testing out their nifty ABL capability of targeting an incoming

LEO item, from an operationally cloaked altitude of 40,000+ feet?



http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices...ips/index.html

http://www.lb.boeing.com/defense-spa...N_ABL_074.html

http://www.gizmag.com/boeing-airborn...missile/12567/

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread298256/pg1



BP Deep Horizon helipad platform hole:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/0...-scene-photos/

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/924...orm990x669.jpg


The conspirowhacko speaks again. LOL
  #26  
Old February 1st 13, 03:16 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Feb 1, 6:00*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 1, 5:01*am, bob haller wrote:









On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:


On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:


In article ,


says...


On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best


to not attempt recovery of their body?


the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the


coast......


but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long


ago in very deep water?


Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.


It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.


Jeff


--


"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would


magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper


than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in


and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer


really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or


second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys


who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....


Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?


well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,
should the crew be told?


say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry
if nasa was certain of their dying?


Should they have been told about the Phantom Works of TRW/Raytheon and
Boeing testing out their nifty ABL capability of targeting an incoming
LEO item, from an operationally cloaked altitude of 40,000+ feet?

*http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices...itary/abl/pics....
*http://www.lb.boeing.com/defense-spa...s-clips/SMF071....
*http://www.gizmag.com/boeing-airborn...missile/12567/
*http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread298256/pg1

*BP Deep Horizon helipad platform hole:
*http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/0...explosion-on-t....
*http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/924...orm990x669.jpg


The extra amount of thermal sensors incorporated within the underside
of Columbia, of which Boeing Phantom Works always had a direct
satellite link to, made for an ideal test target in order to fully
verify in real time, as to the effective heating caused by their ABL.
DoD contracts always require such demonstrated proof before moving on
with additional R&D funding. These DoD contracts are worth billions,
and to pass up an opportunity of using Columbia as representing a
savings of at least 100 million, should have been a wee bit too
tempting to pass up. Of course If Columbia hadn’t been previously
damaged, the ABL test could have been relatively harmless.
  #27  
Old February 1st 13, 03:27 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Feb 1, 5:01*am, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:









On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:


In article ,


says...


On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best


to not attempt recovery of their body?


the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the


coast......


but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long


ago in very deep water?


Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.


It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.


Jeff


--


"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would


magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper


than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in


and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer


really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or


second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys


who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....


Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?


well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,
should the crew be told?

say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry
if nasa was certain of their dying?


Should they have been told about the Boeing Phantom Works of TRW/
Raytheon testing out their nifty ABL capability of targeting an
incoming
LEO item, from an operationally cloaked altitude of 40,000+ feet?
http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices...itary/abl/pics...
http://www.lb.boeing.com/defense-spa...s-clips/SMF071...
http://www.gizmag.com/boeing-airborn...missile/12567/
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread298256/pg1
BP Deep Horizon helipad platform hole:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/0...explosion-on-t...
http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/924...orm990x669.jpg

The extra amount of thermal sensors incorporated within the underside
of Columbia, of which Boeing Phantom Works always had a direct
satellite link to, made for an ideal test target in order to fully
verify in real time, as to the effective heating caused by their ABL.
DoD contracts always require such demonstrated proof before moving on
with additional R&D funding. These DoD contracts are worth billions,
and to pass up an opportunity of using Columbia as representing a
savings of at least 100 million to Boeing, should have been a wee bit
too tempting to pass up. Of course If Columbia hadn’t been previously
damaged, the ABL test could have been relatively harmless.

No doubt whenever our DoD screws up, we don’t always get to see or
hear about it unless it was being live covered by some media group(s)
in charge of Pentagon and DoD hype, or as having been otherwise
leaked.
  #28  
Old February 1st 13, 05:40 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Friday, February 1, 2013 9:27:53 AM UTC-5, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 1, 5:01*am, bob haller wrote:

On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:




















On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:




In article ,




says...




On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:




ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best




to not attempt recovery of their body?




the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the




coast......




but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long




ago in very deep water?




Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.




It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.




Jeff




--




"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would




magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper




than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in




and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer




really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or




second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys




who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....




Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?




well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,


should the crew be told?




say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry


if nasa was certain of their dying?




Should they have been told about the Boeing Phantom Works of TRW/

Raytheon testing out their nifty ABL capability of targeting an

incoming

LEO item, from an operationally cloaked altitude of 40,000+ feet?

http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices...itary/abl/pics...

http://www.lb.boeing.com/defense-spa...s-clips/SMF071...

http://www.gizmag.com/boeing-airborn...missile/12567/

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread298256/pg1

BP Deep Horizon helipad platform hole:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/0...explosion-on-t...

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/924...orm990x669.jpg



The extra amount of thermal sensors incorporated within the underside

of Columbia, of which Boeing Phantom Works always had a direct

satellite link to, made for an ideal test target in order to fully

verify in real time, as to the effective heating caused by their ABL.

DoD contracts always require such demonstrated proof before moving on

with additional R&D funding. These DoD contracts are worth billions,

and to pass up an opportunity of using Columbia as representing a

savings of at least 100 million to Boeing, should have been a wee bit

too tempting to pass up. Of course If Columbia hadn’t been previously

damaged, the ABL test could have been relatively harmless.



No doubt whenever our DoD screws up, we don’t always get to see or

hear about it unless it was being live covered by some media group(s)

in charge of Pentagon and DoD hype, or as having been otherwise

leaked.


Can you please speak simply without the extraneous crap? So you are claiming the ABL shot down Columbia now?
  #29  
Old February 1st 13, 09:46 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Feb 1, 8:40*am, Dean wrote:
On Friday, February 1, 2013 9:27:53 AM UTC-5, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 1, 5:01*am, bob haller wrote:


On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:


On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:


In article ,


says...


On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:


ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best


to not attempt recovery of their body?


the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the


coast......


but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long


ago in very deep water?


Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.


It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.


Jeff


--


"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would


magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper


than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in


and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer


really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or


second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys


who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....


Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?


well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,


should the crew be told?


say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry


if nasa was certain of their dying?


Should they have been told about the Boeing Phantom Works of TRW/


Raytheon testing out their nifty ABL capability of targeting an


incoming


LEO item, from an operationally cloaked altitude of 40,000+ feet?


*http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices...itary/abl/pics...


*http://www.lb.boeing.com/defense-spa...s-clips/SMF071...


*http://www.gizmag.com/boeing-airborn...missile/12567/


*http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread298256/pg1


*BP Deep Horizon helipad platform hole:


*http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/0...explosion-on-t...


*http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/924...orm990x669.jpg


*The extra amount of thermal sensors incorporated within the underside


of Columbia, of which Boeing Phantom Works always had a direct


satellite link to, made for an ideal test target in order to fully


verify in real time, as to the effective heating caused by their ABL.


DoD contracts always require such demonstrated proof before moving on


with additional R&D funding. *These DoD contracts are worth billions,


and to pass up an opportunity of using Columbia as representing a


savings of at least 100 million to Boeing, should have been a wee bit


too tempting to pass up. *Of course If Columbia hadn’t been previously


damaged, the ABL test could have been relatively harmless.


No doubt whenever our DoD screws up, we don’t always get to see or


hear about it unless it was being live covered by some media group(s)


in charge of Pentagon and DoD hype, or as having been otherwise


leaked.


Can you please speak simply without the extraneous crap? *So you are claiming the ABL shot down Columbia now?


Not just now, but from the very get go, suggesting that the Phantom
Works team took full advantage of the opportunity, which probably
didn't go towards helping to prevent or moderate the demise of
Columbia.

Not one protective tile on Columbia was optional, meaning that each
and every one of those tiles was essential for a safe reentry. Adding
even a minor pilot beam of ABL energy for obtaining those subsequent
thermal readings and confirming their tracking stability testing
probably didn't terminate Columbia, but it sure as hell wasn't helping.
  #30  
Old February 1st 13, 10:11 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default Apollo 13, what if the SMs tank had exploded after the LM hadbeen on the surface

On Friday, February 1, 2013 3:46:04 PM UTC-5, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 1, 8:40*am, Dean wrote:

On Friday, February 1, 2013 9:27:53 AM UTC-5, Brad Guth wrote:


On Feb 1, 5:01*am, bob haller wrote:




On Jan 31, 10:50*am, Dean wrote:




On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:31:45 AM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:




On Jan 31, 9:11*am, Jeff Findley wrote:




In article ,




says...




On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:11:36 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:




ok to make it clear you believe that if anyone dies in space its best




to not attempt recovery of their body?




the challenger bodies and crew compartment were in deep water off the




coast......




but its ok to recover gus grissoms mercury capsule that sunk so long




ago in very deep water?




Do you have problems with common sense? *Which is easier? *Recovering a body from the moon or one in water off the coast of FL? *Really, Bob, you need to think a bit deeper sometimes.




It's clear that Bob is out of his depth.




Jeff




--




"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would




magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper




than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in




and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer




really look at the efforts today to recover remains from korea or




second world war. why spend time and money the 2nd world war familys




who knew the victims have probably mostly died of old age....




Jesus, Bob! *You really are denser than osmium, aren't you?




well heres a connected issue, if nasa decides a crew is doomed to die,




should the crew be told?




say the columbia crew, should they have been informed before re entry




if nasa was certain of their dying?




Should they have been told about the Boeing Phantom Works of TRW/




Raytheon testing out their nifty ABL capability of targeting an




incoming




LEO item, from an operationally cloaked altitude of 40,000+ feet?




*http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices...itary/abl/pics...




*http://www.lb.boeing.com/defense-spa...s-clips/SMF071...




*http://www.gizmag.com/boeing-airborn...missile/12567/




*http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread298256/pg1




*BP Deep Horizon helipad platform hole:




*http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/0...explosion-on-t...




*http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/924...orm990x669.jpg




*The extra amount of thermal sensors incorporated within the underside




of Columbia, of which Boeing Phantom Works always had a direct




satellite link to, made for an ideal test target in order to fully




verify in real time, as to the effective heating caused by their ABL.




DoD contracts always require such demonstrated proof before moving on




with additional R&D funding. *These DoD contracts are worth billions,




and to pass up an opportunity of using Columbia as representing a




savings of at least 100 million to Boeing, should have been a wee bit




too tempting to pass up. *Of course If Columbia hadn’t been previously




damaged, the ABL test could have been relatively harmless.




No doubt whenever our DoD screws up, we don’t always get to see or




hear about it unless it was being live covered by some media group(s)




in charge of Pentagon and DoD hype, or as having been otherwise




leaked.




Can you please speak simply without the extraneous crap? *So you are claiming the ABL shot down Columbia now?




Not just now, but from the very get go, suggesting that the Phantom

Works team took full advantage of the opportunity, which probably

didn't go towards helping to prevent or moderate the demise of

Columbia.



Not one protective tile on Columbia was optional, meaning that each

and every one of those tiles was essential for a safe reentry. Adding

even a minor pilot beam of ABL energy for obtaining those subsequent

thermal readings and confirming their tracking stability testing

probably didn't terminate Columbia, but it sure as hell wasn't helping.


Oh dear lord! How do you conspirowhackos come up with this stuff?
 




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
Apollo Lunar Surface Communications Requirements Alan Erskine[_3_] History 8 May 11th 12 04:59 AM
your dicks will be exploded Quotation G. Humbles News 0 November 2nd 06 08:42 AM
your dicks will be exploded Cricketers F. Preshrank News 0 October 31st 06 06:13 PM
To the Seven Servants (Angels of the Apocalypse). Physics isWar. To the 144,000 of the Tribes of Israel. On the Final Judaic War. Onthe Fall of Babylon. On the nuclear Holocaust of the Egyptian cultists /Usuryists / Christians / Neo-Nazis. The Vi Steve Astronomy Misc 1 March 21st 05 04:28 PM
To the Seven Servants (Angels of the Apocalypse). Physics isWar. To the 144,000 of the Tribes of Israel. On the Final Judaic War. Onthe Fall of Babylon. On the nuclear Holocaust of the Egyptian cultists /Usuryists / Christians / Neo-Nazis. The Vi Steve UK Astronomy 1 March 21st 05 04:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:56 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.