A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Dart too sensitive for public release?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 19th 06, 03:16 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old April 19th 06, 07:37 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old April 19th 06, 07:48 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old April 21st 06, 04:38 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old April 24th 06, 02:40 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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

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
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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:05 PM.


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.