A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

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

...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 16th 08, 08:54 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26

On Dec 16, 9:42*am, " wrote:

in typical *nasa fashion they abandoned the successful model which
could of been duplicated easily on a production line basis, and many
more sent to explore.


You aren't understanding the way this works. If we were seriously
going to be exploring to prepare for a landing that is surely what we
would do. (In fact, that's what we did do for the moon in the 1960's
with the Ranger, Surveyor, and Lunar Orbiter programs, each of which
had several coordinated missions). But this isn't about exploring
different spots to see where the best and most interesting places to
land and explore further with humans would be (any such work would be
in the future, once Congress actually starts seriously funding the
Constellation program). This is about answering as many different
questions as possible on a given budget. Spirit and Opportunity
answered the big top-line questions that they were supposed to: was
there ever liquid water on Mars? (Answered affirmatively by the two
rovers.) With more rovers, you could get more detailed and better
answers to that particular question, or you could send a different set
of instruments on a different platform (to support these different
sensors) and try to answer a different top-line question (like looking
for actual evidence of life, say). And all of the people who are
working on questions other than evidence of water in the Martian past
want a chance to get their questions answered. So instead of building
more rovers to better explore that question we get new craft designed
to give a general answer to other questions- say about Titan, or
Europa, or the Martian atmosphere.

The rovers don't really work well as a general purpose bus. Spirit and
Opportunity would be poor platforms for looking for life, as an
example. In order to do that properly you need to sterilize the craft
before launching (so you can be sure you aren't finding earth microbes
that have hitched a ride), and the rovers were not designed for that-
and you really need to design the electronics to survive being baked
like that, or you just built a very expensive brick. In addition, the
air bag system would probably be dropped for future missions- it
turned out to be far more complicated than expected (in particular,
they tried to avoid the need for a steerable braking rocket system
with the airbags, but the mass of the rovers meant that they had to
have such a system anyway- if you have to have a steerable braking
rocket you might as well soft land). So it was pretty much inevitable
that the next generation of rover would not be like Spirit and
Opportunity.

People have looked at using a common bus design to support multiple
missions with different sensors to answer different questions, but it
turns out to not be a great solution. Look at the history of the
Planetary Observer program for reasons why. Or Netlander, which didn't
even get that far.

Chris Manteuffel
Ads
  #12  
Old December 17th 08, 04:13 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
M
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 110
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26

On Dec 16, 9:42*am, " wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:55 am, "Brian Gaff" wrote:

You lot are more cynical than I am.


Brian


supringsly nasa did build spirit and opportunity, which are fantastic.

in typical *nasa fashion they abandoned the successful model which
could of been duplicated easily on a production line basis, and many
more sent to explore.

they are compartively so cheap is a shame we havent sent more


Actually, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory build the MER Spirit and
Opportunity.
JPL is under contract from NASA. So is JHUAPL, who built and operate
New Horizons and did the NEAR mission to Eros
  #13  
Old December 17th 08, 03:13 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26


"M" wrote in message
...
Actually, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory build the MER Spirit and
Opportunity.
JPL is under contract from NASA. So is JHUAPL, who built and operate
New Horizons and did the NEAR mission to Eros


It's hopeless to correct Bob Haller. He's a well known net kook who's logic
and reasoning skills are hopelessly flawed. That's why he's in most
everyone's killfile.

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson


  #14  
Old December 17th 08, 09:30 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
Bob S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26


"OM" wrote in mesage
...
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:13:50 -0500, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:

It's hopeless to correct Bob Haller. He's a well known net kook who's
logic
and reasoning skills are hopelessly flawed. That's why he's in most
everyone's killfile.


...And for the record, here's who's in most people's killfiles:

Bbo Hallr (Bob Haller)
Ian Parker
Eric Chomko
Fred McCall
"kT" (Elfnazi, Tommy Lee Elfritz)
"Proponent"
"American"
"jonathan"

...And, of course, Brad Guth.


I agree Guth is a weird one. I'm never sure if he's joking or posting from
an asylum.



  #15  
Old December 18th 08, 12:39 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26


"Bob S." wrote in message
...

"OM" wrote in mesage
...
...And for the record, here's who's in most people's killfiles:

Bbo Hallr (Bob Haller)
Ian Parker
Eric Chomko
Fred McCall
"kT" (Elfnazi, Tommy Lee Elfritz)
"Proponent"
"American"
"jonathan"

...And, of course, Brad Guth.


I agree Guth is a weird one. I'm never sure if he's joking or posting from
an asylum.


Does it really matter? The content is killfile worthy either way.

To edit OM's list, Fred McCall isn't killfile worthy, IMHO. I've not
decided about Ian Parker yet. But in addition to everyone else on OM's
list, I've got a whole bunch more...

Maxson
cosmic lifeform
Willie Mookie
....

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson


  #16  
Old December 18th 08, 03:26 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
jonathan[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 485
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26


"OM" wrote in message



...What other *******s am I missing here?

OM





--

]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[



  #17  
Old December 18th 08, 03:30 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
jonathan[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 485
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26


"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

"Bob S." wrote in message
...

"OM" wrote in mesage
...
...And for the record, here's who's in most people's killfiles:

Bbo Hallr (Bob Haller)
Ian Parker
Eric Chomko
Fred McCall
"kT" (Elfnazi, Tommy Lee Elfritz)
"Proponent"
"American"
"jonathan"

...And, of course, Brad Guth.


I agree Guth is a weird one. I'm never sure if he's joking or posting from an
asylum.


Does it really matter? The content is killfile worthy either way.

To edit OM's list, Fred McCall isn't killfile worthy, IMHO. I've not decided
about Ian Parker yet. But in addition to everyone else on OM's list, I've got
a whole bunch more...




Kinda like jr high school in here.





Maxson
cosmic lifeform
Willie Mookie
...

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today. My
own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson



  #18  
Old December 18th 08, 04:30 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26

OM wrote:

:On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:13:50 -0500, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:
:
:It's hopeless to correct Bob Haller. He's a well known net kook who's logic
:and reasoning skills are hopelessly flawed. That's why he's in most
:everyone's killfile.
:
:...And for the record, here's who's in most people's killfiles:
:
:Bbo Hallr (Bob Haller)
:Ian Parker
:Eric Chomko
:Fred McCall
:"kT" (Elfnazi, Tommy Lee Elfritz)
:"Proponent"
:"American"
:"jonathan"
:
:...And, of course, Brad Guth.
:
:...What other *******s am I missing here?
:

Oh, look. Here comes one now.

: OM

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine
  #19  
Old December 18th 08, 03:21 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26

On Dec 15, 6:38*pm, "jonathan" wrote:
X-37bhttp://space.skyrocket.de/index_frame.htm?http://www.skyrocket.de/spa...

February 26, 2009: A United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket to launch the
Pentagon's X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle space plane prototype from Cape Canaveral
Air Force Station in Cape Canaveral, Fla.http://www.space.com/missionlaunches..._schedule.html

"The X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle is similar to the space shuttle, except it's
about a fourth the size and unmanned. The OTV can return from space on its own,
said Lt. Col. Kevin Walker, an Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office program
manager. "
"The X-37 program, originally a NASA initiative, was transferred to the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency in 2004. The Air Force's X-37B program builds
upon the early development and testing conducted by NASA, DARPA and the Air
Force Research Laboratory."http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123032226

* * Gee, I wonder what else was transferred from NASA to the military under
Bush?

WASHINGTON The U.S. Air Force has decided not to adopt NASAs orphaned X-33
and X-34 experimental rockets or take on a greater role in the agencys X-37
space
vehicle program, according to industry and government sources.
X-37, meanwhile, remains a funded NASA program with limited Air Force
involvement.
An Air Force spokesperson declined to comment on the matterhttp://www.space.com/news/military_space_010905.html

.....ohmygosh....they lied to us about the X-37! *Go figure.
* * * * So what really happened to the X-33?

NASA Concludes X-33 Engine Test Series with
90-Second Burn

"There were no anomalies," Foerman said. "It looks like it was a good test.

  #20  
Old December 18th 08, 03:33 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station,sci.military.naval
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default ...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26

On Dec 15, 6:54*pm, (J.D. Baldwin)
wrote:
In the previous article, jonathan wrote:

* * Gee, I wonder what else was transferred from NASA to the
military under Bush?


If you want a list, just write down all the stuff that actually
works. *That's the stuff NASA doesn't do.


That's a rather substantial list, and it's growing.

Why don't we ask our William Mook (aka wizard of Oz) to take over?

If all agencies (including DoD) and public funded services (including
retirements and benefits) were given a presidential mandate of -10%/
year budget, what would survive?

~ BG
 




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
Current US military thinking on launch needs Allen Thomson Policy 20 March 13th 05 02:31 AM
Russia to launch military satellite JimO Policy 1 March 23rd 04 07:30 PM
ESA hopes to launch Rosetta late February Hop David History 1 February 16th 04 07:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.