NASA declines to protect the Planet Earth

Andy Resnick wrote:
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:

Andy Resnick wrote:

enchomko wrote:
snip


All of them, in every aspect and in every center? I beg to differ.
Sure, there are problems and those are the ones the media tell you
about. But of that list, which ones were done poorly? Aqua? No picture
perfect in virtually every aspect!


No, not all of them. Of course not. But, let's look at Aqua since
you selected it. Aqua has 6 instruments on board:

* AMSR-E - Furnished by the National Space Development Agency of
Japan.
* MODIS - Furnished by Santa Barbara Remote Sensing
* AMSU-A -Furnished by Boeing.
* AIRS - Furnished by JPL.
* HSB - Furnished by Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais of
Brazil.
* CERES - Furnished by TRW.

The satellite itself was built by TRW. The satellite was launched on
the Delta 7000 (manufactured by Lockheed).


Er ... minor nit ... isn't Delta a Boeing rocket?

I got some info from:

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/dela7000.htm

Not clear what the page date is.

McDonald-Douglas is now Boeing. They merged.

Lockheed is their competitor.

Nice try. Keep up the good work!

http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (31 Jul 2006 11:25:54 -0700) it happened "enchomko"
wrote in
.com:

Those toy cars still work and at 30-100+ million miles, that is a
pretty slick trick.

That is distance, not miles run.
Now think $ per mile... ;-)

Compared to what? Let's start with hours alive on Mars and compare it
to Beagle 2 for starters and then Viking and then Russian Martian
spacecraft.

Seems silly to try and make the MER missions out to be toys doesn't it?
Sort of reminds me of the people that all they could talk about Babe
Ruth was how fat he was.

But will it help us go to the stars? very little.

Mars is closer to the stars than is anything in LEO or on the Moon.
Sure Mars to the stars is a hellova a long way but it is still closer
than anything else. Again, your "closer to the stars" comment is silly
on its face.

They had a lander with a rocket engine, it crashed because
some sensor thought it landed, while it was till up high in the air.

Old fricken news! Yes, yes the standard vs. metric debacle (ha, ha,
ha!). Well, MER is an in-your-face success, silly boy. I sincerely hope
that its success pains you as much as the joy you got from laughing the
previous Mars mission failures. (What are you, French?)

Now _such_ a lander is what you will need to carry _humans_,
so they should just have fixed it, AND provide telemetry when it landed.

We are not going to send humans to the Martian surface until we can get
a robotic sample return mission to work successfully (i.e. send a
lander to Mars, have it scoop up Martian soil and then blast off back
to Earth with said samples.) Proof of concept. Send something there and
bring it back with part of Mars with it. Get it?!?

They could not have telemetry as the plasma during landing would interfere...
Strange, even Huygens probe had telemetry...
So anyways playing RC cars on mars is nothing compared to a guy driving
a mars rover right there.

You're going to have to have a soil sample return work first, IMO.

You stay here within reach of Israeli attacks, while you could have been
safe with Von Braun's project on mars.

Hey, let's round up every person in Israel and send then to your
country? How about it? No! Why not? Where would you have them go? US?
Why not YOUR country?

Are you doing your part to devalue the euro?

Eric

....

On a sunny day (1 Aug 2006 07:26:39 -0700) it happened "enchomko"
wrote in
om:


Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (31 Jul 2006 11:25:54 -0700) it happened "enchomko"
wrote in
.com:

Those toy cars still work and at 30-100+ million miles, that is a
pretty slick trick.

That is distance, not miles run.
Now think $ per mile... ;-)

Compared to what?

First: Note the ;-) then compare it to anything you want, your car,
you taxes, your national deficit, your bank account... who cares.


Let's start with hours alive on Mars and compare it
to Beagle 2 for starters and then Viking and then Russian Martian
spacecraft.

You completely miss the point I am trying to make.
I say: Manned mission to mars.
And that is what GWBush says too, although on just about every other
issue I disagree with him it seems.
For a manned mission you need expertise (experience) with lander technology
that _can_ do manned missions, that very likely excludes _airbags_.


Seems silly to try and make the MER missions out to be toys doesn't it?
Sort of reminds me of the people that all they could talk about Babe
Ruth was how fat he was.

Irrelevant.

But will it help us go to the stars? very little.

Mars is closer to the stars than is anything in LEO or on the Moon.
Sure Mars to the stars is a hellova a long way but it is still closer
than anything else. Again, your "closer to the stars" comment is silly
on its face.

No, it is not.
And _stars_ here also included the planets, but yes, manned space travel.
It will not help humanity if robots still roam other planets but we are
extinct here because of WW3[4,5,6,7,8,9] radiation.

They had a lander with a rocket engine, it crashed because
some sensor thought it landed, while it was till up high in the air.

Old fricken news! Yes, yes the standard vs. metric debacle (ha, ha,
ha!).

Nope, it was not that, check your history, it was 2 teams (yes same
in effect OK) that were at work without understanding what the other was
doing, no 'supervisor' for the big picture (like Von Braun was), so bound
to create bloat design full of errors.
As a side: how can _anyone_ get away with mounting micro switches or
acceleration sensors the wrong way around in a spacecraft, was the designer
not allowed to inspect what he designed? What an insane organisation that
causes that.

Well, MER is an in-your-face success, silly boy. I sincerely hope
that its success pains you as much as the joy you got from laughing the
previous Mars mission failures. (What are you, French?)

No I am not French, yes they drive around, with plenty problems (software
failed as miserable as their Java 3d demo did), all fixes.
But that system will not get you to mars.
A system that DID bring you to mars would have allowed
(and hopefully _will_ allow) you to do on site investigation over a much
wider area.

There really is no engineering problem living on mars, the problem is
that there is no political will.
NASA's goals are changed every administration, so with bad luck every
4 years, projects are started, scrapped, started, scrapped, if any engineers
want to stay after living through a couple of those cycles seeing years of
work destroyed, it must be because of job security.,, safe pay...

Now _such_ a lander is what you will need to carry _humans_,
so they should just have fixed it, AND provide telemetry when it landed.

We are not going to send humans to the Martian surface until we can get
a robotic sample return mission to work successfully (i.e. send a
lander to Mars,

Moon landings did not have a sample return first either, irrelevant.

have it scoop up Martian soil and then blast off back
to Earth with said samples.) Proof of concept. Send something there and
bring it back with part of Mars with it. Get it?!?

35 years ago they knew how to land and take of, you could have taken it
further.
But you did not.

They could not have telemetry as the plasma during landing would interfere...
Strange, even Huygens probe had telemetry...
So anyways playing RC cars on mars is nothing compared to a guy driving
a mars rover right there.

You're going to have to have a soil sample return work first, IMO.

Why?

You stay here within reach of Israeli attacks, while you could have been
safe with Von Braun's project on mars.

Hey, let's round up every person in Israel and send then to your
country? How about it? No! Why not? Where would you have them go? US?
Why not YOUR country?

Well, US grabbed the land from the Arabs to make Israel.
Arabs fight to get it back.
US invaded 44 or more countries since WW2.
US actually grabbed the land from the native injuns, it is the right of
the strongest.
Israel will have a problem that first there were 2, then 4, then 16,
population growth, and it will want the countries around it for settlements.
_That_ war will never end.


Are you doing your part to devalue the euro?

As the situation is now the US dollar loses value against the Euro,
some oil producing countries want payment in Euros, so $ devaluates itself.
Ever since Nixon decoupled it from the value of gold.
Gold goes up in these times.

With politics like GWBush's global destruction the forces against the US will
become stronger and stronger (and against Israel too).
Bush actually wants that, he, a Saudi mole, only wants high oil prices, and
keep the weapon sales running, your only export product, apart from MS windows,
Billy got out of there, he uses Linux at home I think.
LOL

Chinese may be first on mars!

Eventually you will all have to leave N America because of ice age, and
politely knock on the door of the Arab countries and Mexico, and ask asylum
as a climate fugitive.
If you did not build your home on some other planet:-)

Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (1 Aug 2006 07:26:39 -0700) it happened "enchomko"
wrote in
om:


Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (31 Jul 2006 11:25:54 -0700) it happened "enchomko"
wrote in
.com:

Those toy cars still work and at 30-100+ million miles, that is a
pretty slick trick.

That is distance, not miles run.
Now think $ per mile... ;-)

Compared to what?

First: Note the ;-) then compare it to anything you want, your car,
you taxes, your national deficit, your bank account... who cares.


Let's start with hours alive on Mars and compare it
to Beagle 2 for starters and then Viking and then Russian Martian
spacecraft.

You completely miss the point I am trying to make.
I say: Manned mission to mars.
And that is what GWBush says too, although on just about every other
issue I disagree with him it seems.
For a manned mission you need expertise (experience) with lander technology
that _can_ do manned missions, that very likely excludes _airbags_.


We are not ready for a manned mission to Mars until we can prove we can
send anything to Mars and bring it back with some of Mars with it (i.e.
soil sample return mission).


Seems silly to try and make the MER missions out to be toys doesn't it?
Sort of reminds me of the people that all they could talk about Babe
Ruth was how fat he was.

Irrelevant.

But will it help us go to the stars? very little.

Mars is closer to the stars than is anything in LEO or on the Moon.
Sure Mars to the stars is a hellova a long way but it is still closer
than anything else. Again, your "closer to the stars" comment is silly
on its face.

No, it is not.
And _stars_ here also included the planets, but yes, manned space travel.
It will not help humanity if robots still roam other planets but we are
extinct here because of WW3[4,5,6,7,8,9] radiation.

If your prime motivation for space exploration is fear of lack of
survival of world wars, then you're doomed to begin with. It seems what
you want is a space colony to simply leave earth to never return.


They had a lander with a rocket engine, it crashed because
some sensor thought it landed, while it was till up high in the air.

Old fricken news! Yes, yes the standard vs. metric debacle (ha, ha,
ha!).

Nope, it was not that, check your history, it was 2 teams (yes same
in effect OK) that were at work without understanding what the other was
doing, no 'supervisor' for the big picture (like Von Braun was), so bound
to create bloat design full of errors.

From: http://www.astrodigital.org/mars/mission_past.html

Mars Climate Orbiter 9/23/99

"Also known as the Mars Surveyor 98 Orbiter, this orbiter mission was
entering Mars orbit but crashed to the surface as a result of a
misunderstanding over English vs Metric units. "

As a side: how can _anyone_ get away with mounting micro switches or
acceleration sensors the wrong way around in a spacecraft, was the designer
not allowed to inspect what he designed? What an insane organisation that
causes that.

No, just one where the older workers weren't communicating with the
younger workers.

Well, MER is an in-your-face success, silly boy. I sincerely hope
that its success pains you as much as the joy you got from laughing the
previous Mars mission failures. (What are you, French?)

No I am not French, yes they drive around, with plenty problems (software
failed as miserable as their Java 3d demo did), all fixes.

MER has problems but since it was a 90 day mission that has lasted over
two years, how can you call it anything but a success? The damn things
are still working despite a complete lock-up of one of the rover's 6
wheels. Hell, they have taken advanatage of the extra deep trench left
by the wheel by doing further examination of the track!

But that system will not get you to mars.
A system that DID bring you to mars would have allowed
(and hopefully _will_ allow) you to do on site investigation over a much
wider area.

I like the weighted balloon concept:
http://www.tsgc.utexas.edu/archive/f...ars_photos.pdf

There really is no engineering problem living on mars, the problem is
that there is no political will.

We are not ready to send astronauts 100+ million miles away for two
years with everything they'll need to live off of, just yet.

NASA's goals are changed every administration, so with bad luck every
4 years, projects are started, scrapped, started, scrapped, if any engineers
want to stay after living through a couple of those cycles seeing years of
work destroyed, it must be because of job security.,, safe pay...

Most missions get implemented. What they do is another story.


Now _such_ a lander is what you will need to carry _humans_,
so they should just have fixed it, AND provide telemetry when it landed.

We are not going to send humans to the Martian surface until we can get
a robotic sample return mission to work successfully (i.e. send a
lander to Mars,

Moon landings did not have a sample return first either, irrelevant.


You're wrong. You cannot compare the moon to Mars in the context of
human spaceflight other than ability to sustain oneself through
innovation with integrated technology. The point is that a simulation
of going to Mars by first going to the moon with your space tools and
life habitat will tell you what you'll need for two years while putting
you less than a week away from Earth. That said, an Apollo 13 type
rescue worked fine from the moon but would be much harder to pull off
with a Mars flight.

have it scoop up Martian soil and then blast off back
to Earth with said samples.) Proof of concept. Send something there and
bring it back with part of Mars with it. Get it?!?

35 years ago they knew how to land and take of, you could have taken it
further.

But not at 35-100+ million miles away! 250,000 miles. Much closer.

But you did not.

Yes, I am well aware of the history of spaceflight having lived through
it.

They could not have telemetry as the plasma during landing would interfere...
Strange, even Huygens probe had telemetry...
So anyways playing RC cars on mars is nothing compared to a guy driving
a mars rover right there.

You're going to have to have a soil sample return work first, IMO.

Why?

Because it shows that you can send something to Mars, pick something
up, and return it back to earth. And before you claim that that wasn't
done for the moon; don't forget that Mars has an atmosphere and we'd
better make damn sure that we can get anything back from Mars before we
commit human life. It only makes sense.

You stay here within reach of Israeli attacks, while you could have been
safe with Von Braun's project on mars.

Hey, let's round up every person in Israel and send then to your
country? How about it? No! Why not? Where would you have them go? US?
Why not YOUR country?

Well, US grabbed the land from the Arabs to make Israel.

And the land grants were owned by the Jewish people before that.
Palestinians are basically squatters.

Arabs fight to get it back.
US invaded 44 or more countries since WW2.
US actually grabbed the land from the native injuns, it is the right of
the strongest.

Seems to have always been that way. Ever look at the way any animal
works?
If the Arabs were in the superior posistion they be doing the same
thing but with many less fair rules. I've been to Tunisia and dealt
with the economy on a personal basis. I know how it works. Muslims
aren't a bunch of bleeding hearts when it comes to money and goods.

Israel will have a problem that first there were 2, then 4, then 16,
population growth, and it will want the countries around it for settlements.
_That_ war will never end.

Sad but probably true. For the first time in awhile I'm inclined to
think Truman made a mistake for allowing the creation of Israel and
especially where it is.


Are you doing your part to devalue the euro?

As the situation is now the US dollar loses value against the Euro,
some oil producing countries want payment in Euros, so $ devaluates itself.

Which countries? Please be specific.

Ever since Nixon decoupled it from the value of gold.
Gold goes up in these times.

Up and down. Just up right now.

With politics like GWBush's global destruction the forces against the US will
become stronger and stronger (and against Israel too).

Stronger or just madder? I believe the latter but not the former per
se. A unifying hatred of the US isn't necessarily a stronger force just
one that is madder. And hopefully the next US president will mend what
W has done, though it won't happen over night.

Bush actually wants that, he, a Saudi mole, only wants high oil prices, and
keep the weapon sales running, your only export product, apart from MS windows,
Billy got out of there, he uses Linux at home I think.

W has allowed IT to go to India and China. The next president should
focus on mending what W has done and bring IT back to the US.

LOL

Chinese may be first on mars!


Let them. Just make then share their results. They can posture and
plant flag and footprints like we did on the moon, but make then share
the good stuff as we always do.

Eventually you will all have to leave N America because of ice age, and
politely knock on the door of the Arab countries and Mexico, and ask asylum
as a climate fugitive.

Ice age? Have you been watching the glaciers melt?

If you did not build your home on some other planet:-)

The US certainly has problems and is not as pure as many are led to
believe, but we are everywhere and some of us actually do see us for
what we are worth. It is those few that will and have made the
difference.

Eric

Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (1 Aug 2006 07:26:39 -0700) it happened "enchomko"
wrote in
om:


Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (31 Jul 2006 11:25:54 -0700) it happened "enchomko"
wrote in
.com:

Those toy cars still work and at 30-100+ million miles, that is a
pretty slick trick.

That is distance, not miles run.
Now think $ per mile... ;-)

Compared to what?

First: Note the ;-) then compare it to anything you want, your car,
you taxes, your national deficit, your bank account... who cares.


Let's start with hours alive on Mars and compare it
to Beagle 2 for starters and then Viking and then Russian Martian
spacecraft.

You completely miss the point I am trying to make.
I say: Manned mission to mars.
And that is what GWBush says too, although on just about every other
issue I disagree with him it seems.
For a manned mission you need expertise (experience) with lander technology
that _can_ do manned missions, that very likely excludes _airbags_.


We are not ready for a manned mission to Mars until we can prove we can
send anything to Mars and bring it back with some of Mars with it (i.e.
soil sample return mission).


Seems silly to try and make the MER missions out to be toys doesn't it?
Sort of reminds me of the people that all they could talk about Babe
Ruth was how fat he was.

Irrelevant.

But will it help us go to the stars? very little.

Mars is closer to the stars than is anything in LEO or on the Moon.
Sure Mars to the stars is a hellova a long way but it is still closer
than anything else. Again, your "closer to the stars" comment is silly
on its face.

No, it is not.
And _stars_ here also included the planets, but yes, manned space travel.
It will not help humanity if robots still roam other planets but we are
extinct here because of WW3[4,5,6,7,8,9] radiation.

If your prime motivation for space exploration is fear of lack of
survival of world wars, then you're doomed to begin with. It seems what
you want is a space colony to simply leave earth to never return.


They had a lander with a rocket engine, it crashed because
some sensor thought it landed, while it was till up high in the air.

Old fricken news! Yes, yes the standard vs. metric debacle (ha, ha,
ha!).

Nope, it was not that, check your history, it was 2 teams (yes same
in effect OK) that were at work without understanding what the other was
doing, no 'supervisor' for the big picture (like Von Braun was), so bound
to create bloat design full of errors.

From: http://www.astrodigital.org/mars/mission_past.html

Mars Climate Orbiter 9/23/99

"Also known as the Mars Surveyor 98 Orbiter, this orbiter mission was
entering Mars orbit but crashed to the surface as a result of a
misunderstanding over English vs Metric units. "

As a side: how can _anyone_ get away with mounting micro switches or
acceleration sensors the wrong way around in a spacecraft, was the designer
not allowed to inspect what he designed? What an insane organisation that
causes that.

No, just one where the older workers weren't communicating with the
younger workers.

Well, MER is an in-your-face success, silly boy. I sincerely hope
that its success pains you as much as the joy you got from laughing the
previous Mars mission failures. (What are you, French?)

No I am not French, yes they drive around, with plenty problems (software
failed as miserable as their Java 3d demo did), all fixes.

MER has problems but since it was a 90 day mission that has lasted over
two years, how can you call it anything but a success? The damn things
are still working despite a complete lock-up of one of the rover's 6
wheels. Hell, they have taken advanatage of the extra deep trench left
by the wheel by doing further examination of the track!

But that system will not get you to mars.
A system that DID bring you to mars would have allowed
(and hopefully _will_ allow) you to do on site investigation over a much
wider area.

I like the weighted balloon concept:
http://www.tsgc.utexas.edu/archive/f...ars_photos.pdf

There really is no engineering problem living on mars, the problem is
that there is no political will.

We are not ready to send astronauts 100+ million miles away for two
years with everything they'll need to live off of, just yet.

NASA's goals are changed every administration, so with bad luck every
4 years, projects are started, scrapped, started, scrapped, if any engineers
want to stay after living through a couple of those cycles seeing years of
work destroyed, it must be because of job security.,, safe pay...

Most missions get implemented. What they do is another story.


Now _such_ a lander is what you will need to carry _humans_,
so they should just have fixed it, AND provide telemetry when it landed.

We are not going to send humans to the Martian surface until we can get
a robotic sample return mission to work successfully (i.e. send a
lander to Mars,

Moon landings did not have a sample return first either, irrelevant.


You're wrong. You cannot compare the moon to Mars in the context of
human spaceflight other than ability to sustain oneself through
innovation with integrated technology. The point is that a simulation
of going to Mars by first going to the moon with your space tools and
life habitat will tell you what you'll need for two years while putting
you less than a week away from Earth. That said, an Apollo 13 type
rescue worked fine from the moon but would be much harder to pull off
with a Mars flight.

have it scoop up Martian soil and then blast off back
to Earth with said samples.) Proof of concept. Send something there and
bring it back with part of Mars with it. Get it?!?

35 years ago they knew how to land and take of, you could have taken it
further.

But not at 35-100+ million miles away! 250,000 miles. Much closer.

But you did not.

Yes, I am well aware of the history of spaceflight having lived through
it.

They could not have telemetry as the plasma during landing would interfere...
Strange, even Huygens probe had telemetry...
So anyways playing RC cars on mars is nothing compared to a guy driving
a mars rover right there.

You're going to have to have a soil sample return work first, IMO.

Why?

Because it shows that you can send something to Mars, pick something
up, and return it back to earth. And before you claim that that wasn't
done for the moon; don't forget that Mars has an atmosphere and we'd
better make damn sure that we can get anything back from Mars before we
commit human life. It only makes sense.

You stay here within reach of Israeli attacks, while you could have been
safe with Von Braun's project on mars.

Hey, let's round up every person in Israel and send then to your
country? How about it? No! Why not? Where would you have them go? US?
Why not YOUR country?

Well, US grabbed the land from the Arabs to make Israel.

And the land grants were owned by the Jewish people before that.
Palestinians are basically squatters.

Arabs fight to get it back.
US invaded 44 or more countries since WW2.
US actually grabbed the land from the native injuns, it is the right of
the strongest.

Seems to have always been that way. Ever look at the way any animal
works?
If the Arabs were in the superior posistion they be doing the same
thing but with many less fair rules. I've been to Tunisia and dealt
with the economy on a personal basis. I know how it works. Muslims
aren't a bunch of bleeding hearts when it comes to money and goods.

Israel will have a problem that first there were 2, then 4, then 16,
population growth, and it will want the countries around it for settlements.
_That_ war will never end.

Sad but probably true. For the first time in awhile I'm inclined to
think Truman made a mistake for allowing the creation of Israel and
especially where it is.


Are you doing your part to devalue the euro?

As the situation is now the US dollar loses value against the Euro,
some oil producing countries want payment in Euros, so $ devaluates itself.

Which countries? Please be specific.

Ever since Nixon decoupled it from the value of gold.
Gold goes up in these times.

Up and down. Just up right now.

With politics like GWBush's global destruction the forces against the US will
become stronger and stronger (and against Israel too).

Stronger or just madder? I believe the latter but not the former per
se. A unifying hatred of the US isn't necessarily a stronger force just
one that is madder. And hopefully the next US president will mend what
W has done, though it won't happen over night.

Bush actually wants that, he, a Saudi mole, only wants high oil prices, and
keep the weapon sales running, your only export product, apart from MS windows,
Billy got out of there, he uses Linux at home I think.

W has allowed IT to go to India and China. The next president should
focus on mending what W has done and bring IT back to the US.

LOL

Chinese may be first on mars!


Let them. Just make then share their results. They can posture and
plant flag and footprints like we did on the moon, but make then share
the good stuff as we always do.

Eventually you will all have to leave N America because of ice age, and
politely knock on the door of the Arab countries and Mexico, and ask asylum
as a climate fugitive.

Ice age? Have you been watching the glaciers melt?

If you did not build your home on some other planet:-)

The US certainly has problems and is not as pure as many are led to
believe, but we are everywhere and some of us actually do see us for
what we are worth. It is those few that will and have made the
difference.

Eric

Andy Resnick wrote:
enchomko wrote:
snip

All of them, in every aspect and in every center? I beg to differ.
Sure, there are problems and those are the ones the media tell you
about. But of that list, which ones were done poorly? Aqua? No picture
perfect in virtually every aspect!

No, not all of them. Of course not. But, let's look at Aqua since you
selected it. Aqua has 6 instruments on board:

* AMSR-E - Furnished by the National Space Development Agency of Japan.
* MODIS - Furnished by Santa Barbara Remote Sensing
* AMSU-A -Furnished by Boeing.
* AIRS - Furnished by JPL.
* HSB - Furnished by Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais of
Brazil.
* CERES - Furnished by TRW.

The satellite itself was built by TRW. The satellite was launched on
the Delta 7000 (manufactured by Lockheed).

Again, NASA does not build things. NASA directs things to be built.
Parenthetically, finding the above information took a lot longer than it
should have- as a former NASA contractor, I chafe when I see the efforts
of contractors omitted from NASA press briefings. It's shameful.

Everyone knows NASA hires contractors to do the work. What is your
point? That these above entities would coalesced by themselves and have
launched Aqua and provided good earth science all by themselves?

Like a conductor of an orchestra NASA provides leadership and the means
to integrate the sum of the parts into a greater whole. Aqua was one
such example.

Are you familar with IEEE 1553 and IEEE 1394 as the replacement? Do you
blame NASA for current space-rated 1394 problems or Apple? Who is going
to fix those problems?

Eric


--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University

On a sunny day (1 Aug 2006 11:28:08 -0700) it happened "enchomko"
wrote in
.com:

We are not ready for a manned mission to Mars until we can prove we can
send anything to Mars and bring it back with some of Mars with it (i.e.
soil sample return mission).

Once thing occurred to me;
Considering contamination (with hostile micro-organisms) from mars.

What do you think is safer:
1) Bring some possibly contaminated mars soil and stuff to earth, or
2) test it on a few martionauts there.

IMHO it is safer to 'sacrifice' 3 people then the whole of humanity.
What do you think?

And _stars_ here also included the planets, but yes, manned space travel.
It will not help humanity if robots still roam other planets but we are
extinct here because of WW3[4,5,6,7,8,9] radiation.

If your prime motivation for space exploration is fear of lack of
survival of world wars, then you're doomed to begin with. It seems what
you want is a space colony to simply leave earth to never return.

Yes we need to diversify and spread humanity all over the universe.
If done in some futuristic way by sending DNA and supporting hardware,
and leave the evolution to adapt it there on those different planets,
or by building special housing for our current human forms, maybe
both will be done.

From: http://www.astrodigital.org/mars/mission_past.html

Mars Climate Orbiter 9/23/99

"Also known as the Mars Surveyor 98 Orbiter, this orbiter mission was
entering Mars orbit but crashed to the surface as a result of a
misunderstanding over English vs Metric units. "

Yes, but that was not the one I was referring to, I was referring
to the Mars Polar Lander crash:
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/news/news69.html

No, just one where the older workers weren't communicating with the
younger workers.

I have worked in big companies, where one team did one part and an other
team an other part of a project.
Apart from the idiotic interfaces specified (not by engineers always),
in a good organisation the teams have contact.
Nothing to do with 'age'.
Usually younger engineers have less experience and need to be guided more.

I like the weighted balloon concept:
http://www.tsgc.utexas.edu/archive/f...ars_photos.pdf

Pictures pictures pictures,. ESA is doing a very good job at good
color pictures.
If that new NASA thing finishes airo-breaking we will have more pictures
of higher resolution.
We need to go there!
We need to set up a human colony there.
Then the settler's kids can play with balloons :-)


We are not ready to send astronauts 100+ million miles away for two
years with everything they'll need to live off of, just yet.

Plans have been made 30 years ago with tech of that day.

Most missions get implemented. What they do is another story.

Project Prometheus, VASIMIR, I want to see better engines, nuke power,
never mind the greens, we leave them on earth.

Now _such_ a lander is what you will need to carry _humans_,
so they should just have fixed it, AND provide telemetry when it landed.

We are not going to send humans to the Martian surface until we can get
a robotic sample return mission to work successfully (i.e. send a
lander to Mars,

Moon landings did not have a sample return first either, irrelevant.


You're wrong. You cannot compare the moon to Mars in the context of
human spaceflight other than ability to sustain oneself through
innovation with integrated technology. The point is that a simulation
of going to Mars by first going to the moon with your space tools and
life habitat will tell you what you'll need for two years while putting
you less than a week away from Earth. That said, an Apollo 13 type
rescue worked fine from the moon but would be much harder to pull off
with a Mars flight.

Mars and moon are very different, moon will teach you little about living
on mars.


have it scoop up Martian soil and then blast off back
to Earth with said samples.) Proof of concept. Send something there and
bring it back with part of Mars with it. Get it?!?

35 years ago they knew how to land and take of, you could have taken it
further.

But not at 35-100+ million miles away! 250,000 miles. Much closer.

Von Braun had the mars trip worked out, politics found it too expensive.
It _was_ however cheaper then the shuttle ;-)

And the land grants were owned by the Jewish people before that.
Palestinians are basically squatters.

We are all squatters, and all temporarily here.

Arabs fight to get it back.
US invaded 44 or more countries since WW2.
US actually grabbed the land from the native injuns, it is the right of
the strongest.

Seems to have always been that way. Ever look at the way any animal
works?
If the Arabs were in the superior posistion they be doing the same
thing but with many less fair rules.

No fair rules in war (despite Geneva), I would have used nukes if I had them!


I've been to Tunisia and dealt
with the economy on a personal basis. I know how it works. Muslims
aren't a bunch of bleeding hearts when it comes to money and goods.

Israel will have a problem that first there were 2, then 4, then 16,
population growth, and it will want the countries around it for settlements.
_That_ war will never end.

Sad but probably true. For the first time in awhile I'm inclined to
think Truman made a mistake for allowing the creation of Israel and
especially where it is.


Are you doing your part to devalue the euro?

As the situation is now the US dollar loses value against the Euro,
some oil producing countries want payment in Euros, so $ devaluates itself.

Which countries? Please be specific.

I will have to look that up, but it was mentioned:
http://www.countercurrents.org/us-petrov200106.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle8354.htm
etc, just googled: 'iran pay oil euros'


Ever since Nixon decoupled it from the value of gold.
Gold goes up in these times.

Up and down. Just up right now.

Dollar floats, it is just paper, and with a deficit like the US has,
US will have to pay interests, attract money, increase interest rates...
That in turn is bad for business.
You can print only so much paper (bonds) some sucker will have to buy!

Although US has the H bombs to kill anyone who does not 'pay',
it also has the threat of internal divide, creating an external threat
is one of the tricks Bush used to keep it together.
US falling apart was one of Clinton's nightmares I once did read him say.

With an ever lower $ and oil in Euros US economy would stop.

Stronger or just madder? I believe the latter but not the former per
se. A unifying hatred of the US isn't necessarily a stronger force just
one that is madder. And hopefully the next US president will mend what
W has done, though it won't happen over night.

Yes, but I too have been around for a long time, countries _know_
about that instability and will not invest in unreliable relations.

Eventually you will all have to leave N America because of ice age, and
politely knock on the door of the Arab countries and Mexico, and ask asylum
as a climate fugitive.

Ice age? Have you been watching the glaciers melt?

http://www.world-mysteries.com/alignments/mpl_al3b.htm
Extrapolate to the left of the graph at the bottom,
ice age[s] will hit you predictable.
This global warming CO2 business is just that, _business_,
these cycles have always happened.

"enchomko" wrote in
ps.com:

Mars is closer to the stars than is anything in LEO or on the Moon.
Sure Mars to the stars is a hellova a long way but it is still closer
than anything else. Again, your "closer to the stars" comment is silly
on its face.

Exsqueeze Me? Earth is closer to one star than Mars, and the interplanetary distance between Earth and
Mars to any other stars is so trivially miniscule compared to the interstellar distance that they are functionally
identical. THe big difference is one has breathable air and drinkable water and the other doesn't -- why put
yourself at a disadvantage before you even begin your trek?

enchomko wrote:
snip


Everyone knows NASA hires contractors to do the work. What is your
point? That these above entities would coalesced by themselves and have
launched Aqua and provided good earth science all by themselves?

Like a conductor of an orchestra NASA provides leadership and the means
to integrate the sum of the parts into a greater whole. Aqua was one
such example.

That's not entirely true either. NASA is directed to fund certain
projects, NASA does not "decide" what to fund. For example, NIH funds
billions of dollars of medical research- NIH does not claim to be
finding the cures of disease, NIH claims that it funds world-class
research.

Your impression of NASA, what it does and how it functions, is
approximately 30 years out of date.



Are you familar with IEEE 1553 and IEEE 1394 as the replacement? Do you
blame NASA for current space-rated 1394 problems or Apple? Who is going
to fix those problems?

Who indeed?

--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University

When was NASA charged with the responsibility to protect the planet?

I thought that was the EPA's job.

Maybe if it could be told that the threats from outer space would
damage the habitats of some protected vermin, the animal rights Nazis
would do the job.

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA