|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Dart too sensitive for public release?
"Lord Vain" wrote in
om: Today, NASA has a real interest in automated docking/rendezvouz technology for the 'new' moon program and they're therefore developing it, but the DOD also wants to use it (may even be funding a large part of it) for their hunter-killer satellites but they insist on secrecy. It's pretty obvious that the revealing of the failure could give third parties a good insight how NASA/DOD is tackling the automated docking/rendevouz problem. Nice theory but... the DoD already has its own automated rendezvous/docking program (XSS-11) and it appears to be working better than DART already. So the DART mishap report will give no insight into how DoD is tackling the problem; they're using a completely different system. -- JRF Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail, check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and think one step ahead of IBM. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Dart too sensitive for public release?
Lord Vain ) wrote:
: "Eric Chomko" wrote in message : ... : Lord Vain ) wrote: : : : "Craig Fink" wrote in message : : news : : : : http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12319764/ : : quote : : NASA keeps mum on space robot's failure : : DART report considered too sensitive for public release : : ... : : The space agency distributed a new public information policy last : month : : specifying that information protected by ITAR is considered "sensitive : but : : unclassified" and that unauthorized release to news organizations : could : : result in prosecution or disciplinary action. : : end quote : : : : It appears there is more to the story than what is presented in Mr. : : Oberg's story. A quick look at the NASA web site shows: : : : Why does NASA have to be involved in a demonstrator which is obviously a : : cover-up for a military program? : : Because the DOD has 26 times the budget of NASA. Think about that. In two : weeks the DOD spends what NASA does in a whole year. : : The DOD has 30+ times the number of salaried workers that NASA has so that's : not really an eye opener. But that doesn't mean that they always have the : latest and the greatest technology or even the best and the brightest : scientists and engineers. Aside from that: science can't be pushed, it has : to be nurtured, and it's therefore plausible that the DOD wanted this : technology as far back as the '60's but was unable to develop the : technology. Today, NASA has a real interest in automated docking/rendezvouz : technology for the 'new' moon program and they're therefore developing it, : but the DOD also wants to use it (may even be funding a large part of it) : for their hunter-killer satellites but they insist on secrecy. It's pretty : obvious that the revealing of the failure could give third parties a good : insight how NASA/DOD is tackling the automated docking/rendevouz problem. No doubt. : BTW: don't the Russians already have a good automated rendezvouz/docking : system used in Soyuz and Progress? So we're doing DART to keep up with the Russians?!? Sounds so retro Cold War-ish. I thought we outgrew such things? Man, winning the Cold War, in my mind, was that we wouldn't have to play petty oneupmanship games with the Russians as we had already one. I guess some folks just can't let it go. Eric : *** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com *** |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Dart too sensitive for public release?
Eric Chomko wrote:
Lord Vain ) wrote: : "Eric Chomko" wrote in message : ... : Lord Vain ) wrote: : : : "Craig Fink" wrote in message : : news : : : : http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12319764/ : : quote : : NASA keeps mum on space robot's failure : : DART report considered too sensitive for public release : : ... : : The space agency distributed a new public information policy last : month : : specifying that information protected by ITAR is considered "sensitive : but : : unclassified" and that unauthorized release to news organizations : could : : result in prosecution or disciplinary action. : : end quote : : : : It appears there is more to the story than what is presented in Mr. : : Oberg's story. A quick look at the NASA web site shows: : : : Why does NASA have to be involved in a demonstrator which is obviously a : : cover-up for a military program? : : Because the DOD has 26 times the budget of NASA. Think about that. In two : weeks the DOD spends what NASA does in a whole year. : : The DOD has 30+ times the number of salaried workers that NASA has so that's : not really an eye opener. But that doesn't mean that they always have the : latest and the greatest technology or even the best and the brightest : scientists and engineers. Aside from that: science can't be pushed, it has : to be nurtured, and it's therefore plausible that the DOD wanted this : technology as far back as the '60's but was unable to develop the : technology. Today, NASA has a real interest in automated docking/rendezvouz : technology for the 'new' moon program and they're therefore developing it, : but the DOD also wants to use it (may even be funding a large part of it) : for their hunter-killer satellites but they insist on secrecy. It's pretty : obvious that the revealing of the failure could give third parties a good : insight how NASA/DOD is tackling the automated docking/rendevouz problem. No doubt. : BTW: don't the Russians already have a good automated rendezvouz/docking : system used in Soyuz and Progress? So we're doing DART to keep up with the Russians?!? Sounds so retro Cold War-ish. I thought we outgrew such things? Man, winning the Cold War, in my mind, was that we wouldn't have to play petty oneupmanship games with the Russians as we had already one. I guess some folks just can't let it go. Jim Oberg, especially. He's so special. NASA just loves him. http://cosmic.lifeform.org |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Dart too sensitive for public release?
BTW: don't the Russians already have a good automated rendezvouz/docking
system used in Soyuz and Progress? Lord Vain, Of course they do. They just don't have any such R&D as having accomplished prototype landers on film, nor much less any for real AI/robotic fly-by-rocket lunar landers. BTW; at actually hundreds of millions flushed down the nearest space-toilet, XSS-11 is all another butt-load of their infomercial-science. The required human intervention factor isn't even as good as per what the Russians accomplished as of a decade ago. Good thing they don't have to deal with mascons. - Brad Guth |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Dart too sensitive for public release?
"Lord Vain" wrote .... but the DOD also wants to use it (may even be funding a large part of it) for their hunter-killer satellites but they insist on secrecy. ... This is indeed the 'conventional wisdom' but my own investigations have persuaded me it is a 'bad guess'. The DoD seems to want the capability to inspect unusual and suspicious 'other' space objects, but even more, it wants to ability to inspect its OWN space objects for unexpected failure modes or deliberate interference. An auto-rendezvous inspector could be stationed at a refuelling/recharging bay aboard a valuable US space asset and act as a defending capability. Also, for actions against 'other' space objects, autonomy and on-site visual inspection (and nearby loitering to intercept narrow-beamed comm links) is much more important at larger distances from Earth, such as the GEO arc. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dart too sensitive for public release? | Craig Fink | Space Shuttle | 24 | April 24th 06 02:40 PM |
DART mishap report | Pat Flannery | Policy | 3 | December 13th 05 07:52 PM |
DART mishap report | Pat Flannery | History | 3 | December 13th 05 07:52 PM |
Columbia Accident Investigation Board To Release Vols. II-VI of Final Report | Ron Baalke | Space Shuttle | 0 | October 27th 03 02:43 AM |
Final Release of Quasars.Org: 48,215 QSOs and 100,343 QSO candidates | Eric Flesch | Astronomy Misc | 0 | September 4th 03 01:08 PM |