Good News: Slow, but steady progress

On getting back into space:

http://www.wmfe.org/nasa-closer-to-l...ce-again/81979

John Savard

On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 21:40:17 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote:

On getting back into space:

http://www.wmfe.org/nasa-closer-to-l...ce-again/81979

It's nice to have the capacity. Unfortunately, having it means we're
likely to use it, and we still have no good use case for sending
people into space. It just takes money away from truly useful
programs.

Quadibloc wrote in
:

In order to have a good reason to send people into space, they
need to be able to do useful and important things while there.

This requires an improved capability for sending people into
space, which requires some practice to acquire.

You've just described the entire funding requrest for the space
shuttle program.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

In order to have a good reason to send people into space, they need to be able to do useful and important
things while there.

This requires an improved capability for sending people into space, which requires some practice to acquire.

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 08:43:34 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote:

In order to have a good reason to send people into space, they need to be able to do useful and important
things while there.

This requires an improved capability for sending people into space, which requires some practice to acquire.

We've had a great deal of practice, have consumed vast quantities of
money, and have little to show for it.

As I noted, the capability is nice. Unfortunately, we aren't very good
at figuring out how to use it.

On Friday, 5 January 2018 18:06:44 UTC+1, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 08:43:34 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote:

In order to have a good reason to send people into space, they need to be able to do useful and important
things while there.

This requires an improved capability for sending people into space, which requires some practice to acquire.

We've had a great deal of practice, have consumed vast quantities of
money, and have little to show for it.

As I noted, the capability is nice. Unfortunately, we aren't very good
at figuring out how to use it.

It's only Monopoly money! AI will soon come to the rescue!

Moore's seriously, think of the astronomy they could do with all those "upside down" Hubbles.
The CIA has so many of them they always have at least one constantly monitoring the Director's car park.
In case somebody else takes his parking space!

No doubt another is always watching Herre Oberst Von Strumpet's hair-do in infra red.
Just in case he has a wardrobe malfunction.
So Special Forces hair stylists have to parachute in.
Bearing highly classified, weapons grade 'Just For Men!
And, a [top secret] gold plated, 50-caliber, graphene reinforced, comb-over comb.

Happy 2018 to all my readers! 1461 will be along any moment now. If he can find his sun dial watch. ;-)

Quadibloc wrote in
:

On Friday, January 5, 2018 at 11:16:54 AM UTC-7, Chris.B wrote:

The CIA has so many of them they always have at least one
constantly monitoring the Director's car park. In case somebody
else takes his parking space!

Actually, if they did, it wouldn't be as big a waste of the
taxpayers' money as it sounds like.

After all, the spy satellites aren't in geosynchronous orbit,
because then they wouldn't get a good view of Russia or China or
Syria or wherever. When they're passing over the Western
Hemisphere, they haven't anything important to spy on!

You mean all those movies about the massive government conspiracy to
spy on US citizens using spy staellites to track the heroic souls who
have committed the heinous crime of finding out about the conspriacy
*aren't* *true*?

Well, maybe they could watch for people sneaking over the border
from Mexico... or to make sure that Canada isn't up to something
funny!

I read once, that something like 80% of all Canadians are within 100
miles of the border, and this is proof they're massing for an attack.
I supposed you're going to tell me that's not true, either.

You're one of *them*, aren't you?

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

RichA wrote in
:

On Friday, 5 January 2018 00:40:20 UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
On getting back into space:

http://www.wmfe.org/nasa-closer-to-l...nauts-from-u-s
-once-again/81979

John Savard

What is the point of the Starliner? It can only carry 7 people
and next to no cargo. Is it that much cheaper to build/launch
than the Shuttle was?

That would be the entire point, yes, to be cheaper than the shuttle
was. That is, in fact, Musk's entire business plan: to be cheaper
than the shuttle. So far, he's been pretty successful at it.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On Friday, January 5, 2018 at 11:16:54 AM UTC-7, Chris.B wrote:

The CIA has so many of them they always have at least one constantly monitoring the Director's car park.
In case somebody else takes his parking space!

Actually, if they did, it wouldn't be as big a waste of the taxpayers' money as
it sounds like.

After all, the spy satellites aren't in geosynchronous orbit, because then they
wouldn't get a good view of Russia or China or Syria or wherever. When they're
passing over the Western Hemisphere, they haven't anything important to spy on!

Well, maybe they could watch for people sneaking over the border from Mexico...
or to make sure that Canada isn't up to something funny!

John Savard

On Friday, 5 January 2018 00:40:20 UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
On getting back into space:

http://www.wmfe.org/nasa-closer-to-l...ce-again/81979

John Savard

What is the point of the Starliner? It can only carry 7 people and next to no cargo. Is it that much cheaper to build/launch than the Shuttle was?