A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

"NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 17th 08, 11:33 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.



Jorge R. Frank wrote:

easier.


And cheaper, and more likely to work. If the authorities of the day
choose the former, then by definition they aren't competent.


Given the potential air drag of the solar arrays on it when deployed as
airbrakes, it shouldn't take much of a retro burn to get it to come down
where you want.
Somebody's got to film it when they do it, because that's going to light
up the whole sky for a couple of hundred mile's radius.

Pat
  #22  
Old May 17th 08, 02:00 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station,sci.environment
kT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,032
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.

On May 17, 2:01 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
wrote:

What is the ISS useful for?


Existing.

Nothing.


On the contrary, it exists.

Incomptent AmeriKKKan design, Incompetent AmeriKKKan implementation,
Incompetent AmeriKKKan management.


That may be true, but it exists, nevertheless.

Another Failure of AmeriKKKa in space.


You can't fail unless you try.

  #23  
Old May 17th 08, 04:39 PM posted to sci.space.history
Scott Hedrick[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,159
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.


"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
Given the potential air drag of the solar arrays on it when deployed as
airbrakes, it shouldn't take much of a retro burn to get it to come down
where you want.


I once suggested that Mir be wired with sensors for the reentry, but I was
about a year too late- the last flight to Mir was already onboard. The last
flight to ISS should definitely wire it with cameras and other sensors and
several black boxes that can survive the heat and impact. Maybe a few boxes
should be mounted outside.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
  #24  
Old May 17th 08, 05:19 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station,sci.environment
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.

On May 17, 12:01 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
wrote:
What is the ISS useful for?

Nothing.

Incomptent AmeriKKKan design, Incompetent AmeriKKKan implementation,
Incompetent AmeriKKKan management.

Another Failure of AmeriKKKa in space.


As opposed to our having a robust Moon L1 platform/outpost of mostly
robotic instruments, or that of a cool POOF City at Venus L2 would be
absolutely terrific.
.. - Brad Guth
  #25  
Old May 17th 08, 05:24 PM posted to sci.space.history
kT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,032
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.

On May 17, 3:20 am, Dale Carlson wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 22:52:16 -0700 (PDT), kT
wrote:

What would you suggest- boosting it up to orbit forever, while being
inaccessible in any practical sense?


It's already in orbit. It has to be boosted only so that it remains in
orbit, a mere fraction of it's orbital velocity, depending on its
drag. It took hundreds of billions of dollars to design, build, launch
and construct, including shuttle and Soyuz development and operational
costs. Keeping it in orbit only requires only a small fraction of
those costs.


But how would it then be reached with our current manned craft?


They reach it just fine already.

I don't see how Shuttle and especially Soyuz development costs
enter into it.


Launching things to orbit costs money, if you haven't noticed.

But raising ISS's orbit to eliminate drag isn't a trivial thing.


It is compared with the cost of launching the ISS into orbit.

And as I asked before, how then do we access it?


With launch vehicles, the same launch vehicles we use to visit it,
reboost it, and extend it with. Are you that dumb? I can think of quite
a few launch vehicles working right now, the shuttles, Soyuz, two EELVs,
Ariane V, and numerous other nationally funded vehicles already into
production, including a pair of COTS funded vehicles in development.

Reboosting is a continuous process, with very small delta V increments,
it's not as if the ISS is going anywhere far away.

Is it just an orbital monument?


It won't be if you deorbit it.

My understanding is that the plan is to scrap it in India, at a
dockyard with few environmental or workplace safety standards


Your understanding is very weak, let's call it non-existent for
brevity.


It was a joke.


It was a very weak joke as well.

Your inability to grasp that says a lot.


I grasp a pathetic right wing nut case's attempt at conservative humor.

I almost apologized to the group for even responding to you.


No need to apologize, this is the usenet, you can respond at will.

I'll do that now.


Sorry, but you are an idiot.


You are the guy wondering how we get to the ISS, or how we could get to
the ISS. Hint : with rockets. I am merely proposing residual fuel as a
method of reboosting the ISS, which we want to visit anyways, if only as
a monument, and then using the rocket bodies to extend it further.

But have a nice life anyway.


I already have a nice life, thanks. It would be a significantly less
pleasant world if it didn't have manned rockets flying to the ISS.


  #26  
Old May 18th 08, 02:39 AM posted to sci.space.history
Dale Carlson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 211
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.

On Sat, 17 May 2008 11:24:53 -0500, kT wrote:

I grasp a pathetic right wing nut case's attempt at conservative humor.


OK, you got me there. I guess I should stop my frequent (although
small ) contributions to the Obama campaign, and be true to my
actual right wing beliefs. Thanks for clearing that up for me, and bye
bye.

Dale

I must really be a right wing "nut case", as i always vote liberal.
How nutty can a guy get?

  #27  
Old May 18th 08, 03:09 AM posted to sci.space.history
kT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,032
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.

Dale Carlson wrote:

On Sat, 17 May 2008 11:24:53 -0500, kT wrote:

I grasp a pathetic right wing nut case's attempt at conservative humor.


OK, you got me there. I guess I should stop my frequent (although
small ) contributions to the Obama campaign, and be true to my
actual right wing beliefs. Thanks for clearing that up for me, and bye
bye.


I must really be a right wing "nut case", as i always vote liberal.
How nutty can a guy get?


So you don't think Obama is another status quo candidate?

Hahahaha hahahahah ahahah ahahaha ... ****ing rubes.
  #28  
Old May 18th 08, 04:35 AM posted to sci.space.history
Dale Carlson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 211
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.

On Sat, 17 May 2008 21:09:00 -0500, kT wrote:


So you don't think Obama is another status quo candidate?


Why would you care what I think, as you've dismissed me as
being a "pathetic right wing nut case"?

Hahahaha hahahahah ahahah ahahaha ... ****ing rubes.


Plonk (again- you got out somehow)

Dale
  #29  
Old May 18th 08, 06:03 AM posted to sci.space.history
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.


You got that right. A phenomenal waste of time.


You know, it actually didn't use to be.

But now that it has morphed into "Everest Watch" instead of NASA
Watch, it is really quite different. I submitted some comments to his
site pointing out that while what Scott Parazynski is doing a
wonderful personal adventure, it actually isn't relevant to watching
NASA, and only vaguely has anything to do with real exploration for
any one but Scott. In that Scott is doing what many others have
already done, and actually following in their footprints as well as
their footsteps, there is some symbolic reference to the whole "return
to the Moon for the first time" effort.

But Keith threw me off his site. "You made your point", he curtly e-
mailed me.

So let's just all be aware that the "comments" that NASA Watch is now
inviting are well filtered, and if they appear to disagree with Keith,
even if they are civil and in the spirit of good discourse, they're
just not going to show up. That's his prerogative, of course, since
it's his website. But the experiment has been done, and the results
are pretty clear.

Fortunately, there are many other forums that welcome different
perspectives, and actually tolerate some intellectual contrariness.


  #30  
Old May 18th 08, 06:13 AM posted to sci.space.history
kT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,032
Default "NASA Watch" gets really ****ed off.

Dale Carlson wrote:

On Sat, 17 May 2008 21:09:00 -0500, kT wrote:


So you don't think Obama is another status quo candidate?


Why would you care what I think, as you've dismissed me as
being a "pathetic right wing nut case"?


In America, the centrists are the problem.

Hahahaha hahahahah ahahah ahahaha ... ****ing rubes.

 




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
Breaking News: Scott "Doc" Horowitz, the Constellation head, the INVENTOR of the "stick" (a.k.a. Ares-I) and one of the father of the ESAS/VSE plan, is leaving NASA !!! gaetanomarano Policy 2 July 13th 07 06:03 AM
"VideO Madness" "JackO' Pissed!!!..." Colonel Jake TM Misc 0 August 11th 06 09:38 PM
NASA Watch: "Bob Zubrin Steps In It Again" [email protected] Policy 51 June 17th 06 01:08 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:35 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.