A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Well, they must be doing something right...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old February 9th 12, 02:00 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Well, they must be doing something right...


NASA needs (or at least wants) to keep its training facilities, which
were enough for several shuttle crews per year and now only need to
part-train a few Soyuz passengers annually (both in addition to nearly
half of ISS crews), in the hope of regaining, eventually, a USG/NASA
manned launch capability. *They should be happy to hire them out for
whatever money they can get - it will be a buyer's market.

AIUI, the Pool is already hired out for non-space work.


whats the pool being used for?
  #32  
Old February 9th 12, 09:31 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Dr J R Stockton[_148_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Well, they must be doing something right...

In sci.space.policy message MeOdnaDRkLNdwq_SnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@earthlink.
com, Wed, 8 Feb 2012 06:42:55, "Greg (Strider) Moore" mooregr@ignoreth
isgreenms.com posted:


Sure. Remind me who Space X has launched into space again?


Using a currently-available system, SpaceX has launched and safely
recovered a cheese-rated orbital vehicle. A suited man, with couch,
would have enjoyed the ride.

The USAF has launched two X-37 and safely recovered one (the second
seems to like it up there); I believe a suited man could have ridden in
the payload bay instead of what was there and been recovered after maybe
2 orbits.

But what can NASA do with its currently-available systems? Redstone,
Atlas, Titan, Saturn, Shuttle are history - only the Shuttle can fly
again, and for that it now needs a 747.

SpaceX is not now as good as, in the past, NASA was (though it is
cheaper); but NASA now is not as effective, by a greater margin, than
NASA used to be.




Rhetorical Queries - how many NASA staff, of what pay grades, with what
overheads, etc., does NASA have working on financing Commercial Crew,
and for how long will that have eventually run? And how much will
dealing with them cost the companies in salaries, overheads, etc.? In
each case, include lawyers and their costs.

Non-rhetorical question - how do those costs compare with the sums to be
disbursed?

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
  #33  
Old February 10th 12, 04:31 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Robert Love
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 53
Default Well, they must be doing something right...

On 2012-02-07 04:25:30 +0000, David Spain said:

As a private venture, it seems perfectly natural it might seek out
NASA's help to help train its work crews. Or to ask to use of the big
water tank for training its future space worker crews. And it seems
only natural that NASA would be willing to help, for a fee.



No, what NASA is renting out the "big water tank" for is training oil
rig crews who have to take survival training. Yes, NASA and it's
contractor are getting a fee but it ain't for space, at least today.

  #34  
Old February 10th 12, 05:40 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Well, they must be doing something right...

Robert Love wrote:
On 2012-02-07 04:25:30 +0000, David Spain said:

As a private venture, it seems perfectly natural it might seek out
NASA's help to help train its work crews. Or to ask to use of the big
water tank for training its future space worker crews. And it seems
only natural that NASA would be willing to help, for a fee.



No, what NASA is renting out the "big water tank" for is training oil
rig crews who have to take survival training. Yes, NASA and it's
contractor are getting a fee but it ain't for space, at least today.


IMO No - Not Yet.

We can always hope that will change. But it also seems only natural that oil
or natural gas riggers would hire NASA to help with their underwater work as well.

I have no problem with this. I think it is a "good thing".

Dave
  #35  
Old February 10th 12, 05:57 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Well, they must be doing something right...

On Feb 10, 11:40*am, David Spain wrote:
Robert Love wrote:
On 2012-02-07 04:25:30 +0000, David Spain said:


As a private venture, it seems perfectly natural it might seek out
NASA's help to help train its work crews. Or to ask to use of the big
water tank for training its future space worker crews. And it seems
only natural that NASA would be willing to help, for a fee.


No, what NASA is renting out the "big water tank" for is training oil
rig crews who have to take survival training. *Yes, NASA and it's
contractor are getting a fee but it ain't for space, at least today.


IMO No - Not Yet.

We can always hope that will change. But it also seems only natural that oil
or natural gas riggers would hire NASA to help with their underwater work as well.

I have no problem with this. I think it is a "good thing".

Dave


nasa could likely rent out tank as part of be a astronaut, giving the
general public a chance to go in the tank that trained the apollo
astronauts.

that might be a money maker
  #36  
Old February 10th 12, 09:56 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Well, they must be doing something right...

On Feb 10, 2:43*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Feb 10, 11:40*am, David Spain wrote:
Robert Love wrote:
On 2012-02-07 04:25:30 +0000, David Spain said:


As a private venture, it seems perfectly natural it might seek out
NASA's help to help train its work crews. Or to ask to use of the big
water tank for training its future space worker crews. And it seems
only natural that NASA would be willing to help, for a fee.


No, what NASA is renting out the "big water tank" for is training oil
rig crews who have to take survival training. *Yes, NASA and it's
contractor are getting a fee but it ain't for space, at least today.


IMO No - Not Yet.


We can always hope that will change. But it also seems only natural that oil
or natural gas riggers would hire NASA to help with their underwater work as well.


I have no problem with this. I think it is a "good thing".


Dave


nasa could likely rent out tank as part of be a astronaut, giving the
general public a chance to go in the tank that trained the apollo
astronauts.


that might be a money maker


Because introspective navel gazing is EVER so much more important to
Bobbert than actually doing things.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


nope theres big bucks in tourism..... just look at disney

since fred is locked in a institution he fails to realize our economy
is about 1/3rd tourism......
 




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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:05 AM.


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.