|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#511
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
On Mon, 10 May 2004 12:02:21 -0400, in a place far, far away, Michael
Gallagher made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: On Sat, 08 May 2004 16:47:56 GMT, h (Rand Simberg) wrote: I'm saying that NASA should encourage, rather than (as has been its effect, if not intent, since its inception) discourage the development of such infrastructure. I don't see any reason why NASA can't do that AND work towards President Bush's initiative. Neither do I, other than historically, it's had a difficult time in doing so. |
#512
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
On Mon, 10 May 2004 12:02:25 -0400, in a place far, far away, Michael
Gallagher made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: On Sat, 08 May 2004 16:48:50 GMT, h (Rand Simberg) wrote: Because it's been mostly a costly failure in terms of doing anything significant in space? The Shuttle has not lived up to expectations, true. But that does not mean having specialists among the crew, as to having a couple of fighter pilots who are supposed to do anyting, is a bad one. The US was not colonized by sailors; the sailors brought the colonists. You miss the point. The colonists weren't goverment employees. |
#513
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
Michael Gallagher wrote in message . ..
why don't you tell us why *you* think postponing any large-scale space development, exploration, or settlement is a good idea? I think the large scale developent, exploration, and settlement has a better chance of success, over the long term, if is preceded by publicly funded exploration. Yes, I *know* you think that. I asked *why* you think it. And why does "publicly funded exploration" have to be limited to a miniscule handful of government employees? We have public highways, parks, etc. all over the US, yet private citizens are allowed to explore them. Why should space be different? And as noted who knows how many times now, both involve setting up bases on the Moon and Mars, which can also serve as the initial foothold. Yes, but the fact that you call any facility built on the Moon or Mars a "base" does not mean they would all be similar. A NASA base on the Moon would have no more in common with a lunar settlement than Goddard Space Flight Center has with Greenbelt, Maryland. You still haven't explained why having only three or four of them is better than than having hundreds. I don't, but no one is in a position to get hundreds up there at this time. No one is in a position to get five or six to the Moon at this exact time, either. If the US government can spend hundreds of billions developing the capability to send a very small number of people to the Moon -- as you're proposing -- why can't it take the the same money and spend it in a way that would allow a large number of people to go to the Moon? And if I am correct about the large scale colonization benefitting from publicly funded trail blazers, then getting it bass-ackwards insures no one goes anwhere. Nonsense. There have been publicly-funded trailblazers already. I have no idea why you keep denying that. ..... You're advocating an architecture based on superexpensive Shuttle-Derived Vehicles.... Yes, when this thread began, I agreed with the Shuttle-derived option, because it could be built relatively quickly and using exisiting facilities. And I agreed the high costs counted against it. It has advatanges and disadvantages. Using existing facilities is not an advantage when existing facilities cost more than the alternative -- and the proposed schedule belies the claim that it would be "relatively quick." ..... that would delay the development of CATS ..... How is CATS delayed if it is pursued at the same time as other options? Because the systems you propose would squander resources that could be used to develop cheaper vehicles, as well as helping to kill the market for them. Even as NASA brainstorms its Moon/Mars options, Falcon 1 sits on a pad, and the X-Prize contestants are getting very close to trying for it; IIRC, at least one has an FAA liscense for its attempt. Who's delaying whom? The existance of Shuttle, even while grounded, is delaying NASA from taking advantage of vehicles like Falcon 1. A new Shuttle-derived vehicle would further delay it. |
#514
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
Michael Gallagher wrote in message . ..
Do you stand behind your words or not? You said you wanted the US to build bases that were "akin to ...." Hey words: "akin to," as in "similar to." " ......modern military bases." No, not "similar to" at all. Building a base to defend the United States is not similar to building a base to provide you with TV pictures of a base. It's completely different. If you had said "akin to a TV studio," that would be different. |
#515
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
On 11 May 2004 21:48:00 -0700, (Edward
Wright) wrote: Building a base to defend the United States is not similar to building a base to provide you with TV pictures of a base. It's completely different. If you had said "akin to a TV studio," that would be different. All right, Ed, that does it: I have already explained what I meant TWICE, explaining in what way a Moon base would be similar to a military base, and you seem to be going out of your way to miss it. At least you didn't call me a liar this time. If you want to play the game of misquoting people such that they must endlessly repeat themselves, go right ahead. Just don't exepct me to play anymore. Welcome to my killfile. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 2nd 04 12:01 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 2nd 04 03:33 AM |
Selected Restricted NASA Videotapes | Michael Ravnitzky | Space Station | 5 | January 16th 04 04:28 PM |
NASA Selects Explorer Mission Proposals For Feasibility Studies | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | November 4th 03 10:14 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | September 12th 03 01:37 AM |