Working Hand In Glove

h (Rand Simberg) wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:35:55 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
(Len) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:


I think better gloves would be very useful. But
I think that frequent, reliable, low-cost access
is far more important and would open up many new
options.

Why do we have to choose? We need both, and the former can be
achieved much more cheaply than the latter. I do think that a
million-dollar purse would do the job.

I had a sudden vision of an astronaut representing a contestant
glovier exitting the airlock, opening a locker, and tyring to *open a
purse* that has the prize money in it.

/dps

(dave schneider) wrote:

P.S. I'm not sure he used it for in-system voyages, but RAH like the
term "ASTROGATOR" for the person in charge of finding the course of
the vessel.

Not so different from Naval/Maritime usage. The CO gives the order
'set course for', the Navigator determines the actual course.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

(Derek Lyons) wrote in message ...
(Len) wrote:
Our design concept for structures too large to be carried
prefabricated is highly modular. The trick is to have robots
capable of repositioning themselves to do basically repetitive
jobs.

That's great for building the *structure*, but does little for filling
the structure with stuff.

D.

I think the "structure" would comprise most of the mass.
Initial installation of "stuff" and periodic updating
would be inside work with largely prefabricated items.

Best regards,
Len (Cormier)
PanAero, Inc.
(change x to len)
http://www.tour2space.com

(Len) wrote:
Initial installation of "stuff" and periodic updating
would be inside work with largely prefabricated items.

ROTFL.

You make it sound so *simple*.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

Derek Lyons wrote:

I dunno. (In maritime usage 'conning' and 'piloting' are different
functions, but the exact differences always eluded me.) The OOD (of a
ship) usually has the Deck and the Conn, unless we were maneuvering in
or out of restricted waters (read - port), in which case we stationed
a Conning Officer, while the OOD retained the Deck.


From what I've read, piloting would be done by someone who was brought
aboard the vessel - aboard a _pilot boat_ of course- with specific
knowledge of the port to be entered and any hazards it presented
(currents, shoals, wrecks, etc.), who would then either personally take
the vessel into port, or advise the helmsman on what maneuvers to make
on his way to dock....when you docked at a non-U.S.Navy controlled
port... if you ever did- I can't really see a boomer doing this due to
security concerns... did they ever send out a individual to give advice
on how to approach dock?

Pat

Derek Lyons wrote:



P.S. I'm not sure he used it for in-system voyages, but RAH like the
term "ASTROGATOR" for the person in charge of finding the course of
the vessel.



Not so different from Naval/Maritime usage. The CO gives the order
'set course for', the Navigator determines the actual course.


Roger Manning was the astrogator on the Solar Guard spaceship "Polaris"
in the old "Tom Corbett- Space Cadet" book series. Roger handled
navigation in space; Tom was the _pilot_ of the Polaris, and did the
actual steering of the ship, IIRC.

Pat

(Derek Lyons) wrote in message ...
(Len) wrote:
Initial installation of "stuff" and periodic updating
would be inside work with largely prefabricated items.

ROTFL.

You make it sound so *simple*.

D.

I can't really say things would be simple. However,
I do think that the main reason things are perceived as
being so complex is that we have had forty-fivc years of
distortion with respect to how low the cost of access to
space could really be.

Low cost can yield a lot of new, now unthinkable, options.


Best regards,
Len (Cormier)
PanAero, Inc.
(change x to len)
http://www.tour2space.com

Pat Flannery wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:
I dunno. (In maritime usage 'conning' and 'piloting' are different
functions, but the exact differences always eluded me.) The OOD (of a
ship) usually has the Deck and the Conn, unless we were maneuvering in
or out of restricted waters (read - port), in which case we stationed
a Conning Officer, while the OOD retained the Deck.

From what I've read, piloting would be done by someone who was brought
aboard the vessel - aboard a _pilot boat_ of course- with specific
knowledge of the port to be entered and any hazards it presented
(currents, shoals, wrecks, etc.), who would then either personally take
the vessel into port, or advise the helmsman on what maneuvers to make
on his way to dock...

Certainly. But that's what conning a ship s as well, issuing orders
to the Helm.

.when you docked at a non-U.S.Navy controlled
port... if you ever did- I can't really see a boomer doing this due to
security concerns... did they ever send out a individual to give advice
on how to approach dock?

Ayup. You always take a pilot onboard when entering or leaving port.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

(Len) wrote:

(Derek Lyons) wrote in message ...
(Len) wrote:
Initial installation of "stuff" and periodic updating
would be inside work with largely prefabricated items.

ROTFL.
You make it sound so *simple*.


I can't really say things would be simple. However,
I do think that the main reason things are perceived as
being so complex is that we have had forty-fivc years of
distortion with respect to how low the cost of access to
space could really be.

Low cost of access won't change engineering any. Nor will it
introduce magic methods of assembly.

Low cost can yield a lot of new, now unthinkable, options.

But it does not reduce the difficulty of 'building a ship in a
bottle'. It works for ISS because you are plugging modules into a
shell already built and rigged, and launched with the hard-to-rig bits
(ECLSS etc) already installed. Building in space means rigging all
those cables, pipes, ducts, etc... It also means doing the hard bits
in space, rather than on the ground.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

dave schneider wrote:
h (Rand Simberg) wrote in message . ..

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:35:55 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
(Len) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:



I think better gloves would be very useful. But
I think that frequent, reliable, low-cost access
is far more important and would open up many new
options.

Why do we have to choose? We need both, and the former can be
achieved much more cheaply than the latter. I do think that a
million-dollar purse would do the job.


I had a sudden vision of an astronaut representing a contestant
glovier exitting the airlock, opening a locker, and tyring to *open a
purse* that has the prize money in it.

/dps



Not a bad idea. That'd be entertaining. It could be televised.

To get the finalist you could have a series of contests, each
eliminating a fraction of the contestants. Something like American Idol.
You think a G-prize would attract many contestats?

Or alternately an H-Prize for building a better robotic hand.

--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html