A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Reconsideration



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 6th 06, 11:55 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

Pat Flannery ) wrote:
: Rand Simberg wrote:

: I now realize that Mark Whittington is
: right, and that there's a very real chance that the Chinese will beat
: us to the moon, and lay claim to the strategic high ground. But we
: must accept that, and work to change that potential outcome, whatever
: it takes.
:
:

: First off, at the rate they are moving, the Chinese will be on the moon
: around 2025 if at all.
: Second, being up there doesn't give them the "strategic high ground" due
: to the time it would take anything to reach the Earth that was fired
: from the Moon. In fact, if you want to worry about the Chinese high
: ground scenario, watch out for stuff in Earth orbit, not way out on the
: Moon.
: Who knows? SpaceX's next launch attempt might work, although their whole
: Falcon program up to the moment has a distinctly amateurish feel to it
: that I don't think bodes any too well for its ultimate success.

They need to take this in stride and come back stronger sort of like what
happened with Apollo 1. They have more to prove now.

Eric

: Pat

  #22  
Old April 6th 06, 11:55 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: Pat Flannery wrote in
: :

: Rand Simberg wrote:
:
: I now realize that Mark Whittington is
: right, and that there's a very real chance that the Chinese will beat
: us to the moon, and lay claim to the strategic high ground. But we
: must accept that, and work to change that potential outcome, whatever
: it takes.
:
: First off, at the rate they are moving, the Chinese will be on the moon
: around 2025 if at all.
: Second, being up there doesn't give them the "strategic high ground" due
: to the time it would take anything to reach the Earth that was fired
: from the Moon. In fact, if you want to worry about the Chinese high
: ground scenario, watch out for stuff in Earth orbit, not way out on the
: Moon.

: Umm, maybe you haven't realized it yet, but that was Rand's April Fools
: post.

Yep, the most sense he's made ever and it turns out to be a joke.
Pretty bad timing given SpaceX's recent problem, if you ask me.

Eric

: --
: JRF

: Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
: check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
: think one step ahead of IBM.

  #23  
Old April 6th 06, 11:55 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 21:36:14 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jorge
: R. Frank" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
: in such a way as to indicate that:

: Pat Flannery wrote in
: :
:
: Rand Simberg wrote:
:
: I now realize that Mark Whittington is
: right, and that there's a very real chance that the Chinese will beat
: us to the moon, and lay claim to the strategic high ground. But we
: must accept that, and work to change that potential outcome, whatever
: it takes.
:
: First off, at the rate they are moving, the Chinese will be on the moon
: around 2025 if at all.
: Second, being up there doesn't give them the "strategic high ground" due
: to the time it would take anything to reach the Earth that was fired
: from the Moon. In fact, if you want to worry about the Chinese high
: ground scenario, watch out for stuff in Earth orbit, not way out on the
: Moon.
:
: Umm, maybe you haven't realized it yet, but that was Rand's April Fools
: post.

: Pat's always been a little slow on the uptake, albeit amusingly so...

The irony of course is that your little joke is the most coherent post
you've ever made. Sort of reminded me of an addict admitting to their
addiction. And now here you are back using again...

Eric

  #24  
Old April 6th 06, 12:00 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

Jim Kingdon ) wrote:
: Umm, maybe you haven't realized it yet, but that was Rand's April Fools
: post.

: He had me going up until about paragraph 3 or so (I think "We have a
: space station, if we could just muster up the gumption to finish it"
: was about when I stopped asking myself, "gee, what has Rand gotten
: disillusioned about and what new direction does he see?").

Yeah, sort of like "sell the house, sell the wife, sell the kids, sell
everything, I'm gong into the commercial space business...now!", just in
reverse.

Let me reiterate. I want to be wrong, proven wrong. I want my scepticism
of commercial spaceflight to be absolutely disproven with success. I'd
trade my assessment for success in a heartbeat. I don't wish failure on
anyone because I want to be right. Hell, I want to be wrong! But, based
upon results thus far, what can anyone say?

Eric

  #25  
Old April 6th 06, 12:01 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

Umm, maybe you haven't realized it yet, but that was Rand's April Fools
post.


Problem in distinguishing from his 365/24/7 fools jokes, if they are
jokes that is.

  #27  
Old April 6th 06, 12:05 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 17:22:25 -0400, in a place far, far away, Pat
: Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
: such a way as to indicate that:

: Jim Kingdon wrote:
:
: Umm, maybe you haven't realized it yet, but that was Rand's April Fools
: post.
:
:
:
: He had me going up until about paragraph 3 or so (I think "We have a
: space station, if we could just muster up the gumption to finish it"
: was about when I stopped asking myself, "gee, what has Rand gotten
: disillusioned about and what new direction does he see?").
:
:
: I was actually feeling sorry for him, but twas all a sham.

: Gosh and woe, how will I ever get by without the sympathy of Patrick
: Flannery?

Maybe you should develop a sense of sympathy and empathy for starters?

Eric

  #28  
Old April 6th 06, 12:10 PM posted to sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

Pat Flannery wrote:

I think the odds of CEV ever getting built and heading Moonwards are
fairly slim.
We are running one hell of a deficit, and NASA looks like a juicy target
when budget cuts come along.


At one time I thought the book I'm working on would have a chapter on
VSE/ESAS. In the event it's just a few pages, because try as I might I
can't believe that (or a lot of other discretionary spending) will
surviving the fiscal hangover that's coming well before RttMoon.

This isn't a partisan shot; it's arithmetic, as surely as when high
hopes for post-Apollo withered under Democrats in 1967-1968.

  #29  
Old April 6th 06, 01:06 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 06:10:36 -0400, in a place far, far away, Jim
Davis made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

Rand Simberg wrote:

Umm, maybe you haven't realized it yet, but that was Rand's
April Fools post.


Pat's always been a little slow on the uptake, albeit amusingly
so...


I was buying it hook, line, and sinker until I got to the part where
he realized Mark Whittington has been right all along. :-)


Well, I did save that for the end. I didn't think it fair not to
offer *some* clues...

About the only worse way he could have overplayed his hand was to
concede that Eric Chomko or Brad Guth had been right all along...


?!

You mean they haven't been?

  #30  
Old April 6th 06, 01:07 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reconsideration

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 07:01:02 -0400, in a place far, far away, nimcha
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as
to indicate that:

He had me going up until about paragraph 3 or so (I think "We have a
space station, if we could just muster up the gumption to finish it"
was about when I stopped asking myself, "gee, what has Rand gotten
disillusioned about and what new direction does he see?").


I was actually feeling sorry for him, but twas all a sham.


Gosh and woe, how will I ever get by without the sympathy of Patrick
Flannery?


You tricked me, too, although I was fooled mostly by your follow-up
excoriation of a guy who said 'April Fool's' in your website's
comments...


Well, it was still April 1st at the time.

 




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 08:55 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.