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

Worth The Mission?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 2nd 06, 06:30 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,999
Default Worth The Mission?

h (Rand Simberg) wrote:

My thoughts on whether or not to fly Shuttle, and the cult of
astronaut worship:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...UxNjE5MjM1OTE=

You only made one error - but it's the same one most space cadets
make. You fail to realize the 99% of *all* exploration is tooling
around in circles with what amounts to 'science fair' equipment.
Armstrong or Admunsen - they both represent what should be an
invisible minority of media stunts, instead, everyone seems to think
they represent the ne plus ultra of exploration.

Don't take the general public to task for a failing (astronaut
worship) that you suffer from yourself.

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

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

  #22  
Old July 2nd 06, 06:31 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
Paul F. Dietz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 599
Default Worth The Mission?

Pat Flannery wrote:

And I *still* think a National Astronaut Cemetery would be a great idea.


(Cut to image of the tiny graves of the Aerobee mice.) ;-)


The camera pans to the crudely painted wooden sign: Nashanul Astranawt Pet Sematary

Cue horror movie music...

Paul

  #23  
Old July 2nd 06, 06:32 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
John Schilling
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 391
Default Worth The Mission?

On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 04:44:43 -0400, Pat Flannery
wrote:


I hereby propose that we give forty cubic acres of space to anyone who
wants to pioneer it, provided that they liftoff on April 22nd aboard a
Conestoga rocket.


Forty acres on the moon might be a little more appealling, if it
weren't against the Outer Space Treaty...


Yes, but does that forty acres extend into the Lunar regolith regarding
mineral rights?


Whole piles of titanium down there.


There's a whole pile of titanium in my back yard, as well. Probably
yours too.

It is a silly myth that titanium is a really useful but really rare
material, that is common on the Moon and that we can start using to
e.g. build big strong featherweight 100-MPG cars once we can get it
from the Moon.

The reality is, titanium is common on the Moon, and it's common on
the Earth, and it's too damned much of a pain in the ass to extract
and work with to be worth the bother except for niche applications,
even if someone hands you unlimited quantities of ore for free. The
Moon's titanium isn't any easier to extract or work with than the
Earth's, and it is inconveniently located on the Moon rather than
on the Earth, so it isn't going to see much use at all.

Too many space enthusiasts have bought uncritically into the myth.

This should stop.


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-718-0955 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *

  #24  
Old July 2nd 06, 07:28 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default Worth The Mission?

On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 13:30:53 -0400, in a place far, far away,
(Derek Lyons) made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

(Rand Simberg) wrote:

My thoughts on whether or not to fly Shuttle, and the cult of
astronaut worship:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...UxNjE5MjM1OTE=

You only made one error - but it's the same one most space cadets
make. You fail to realize the 99% of *all* exploration is tooling
around in circles with what amounts to 'science fair' equipment.


For some values of "exploration," perhaps. And even if one buys that
definition, most of it is done much more cost effectively.

  #25  
Old July 3rd 06, 02:55 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
Greg D. Moore (Strider)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Worth The Mission?

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:46:31 -0400, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Rand Simberg wrote:

I'm not sure there is (though an expedition to Mars or an asteroid
might suffice). I'm also not sure that we should want to.

I'd rather get people to think about space as a new frontier where all
kinds of pioneers can go, and risk their lives for their own goals and
purposes, rather than as a preserve for heroic government employees.



I hereby propose that we give forty cubic acres of space to anyone who
wants to pioneer it, provided that they liftoff on April 22nd aboard a
Conestoga rocket.


Forty acres on the moon might be a little more appealling, if it
weren't against the Outer Space Treaty...


So?

Perhaps it's time to renegotiate that.




  #26  
Old July 3rd 06, 02:58 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default Worth The Mission?

On Mon, 03 Jul 2006 09:55:53 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Greg D.
Moore (Strider)" made the phosphor on
my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Forty acres on the moon might be a little more appealling, if it
weren't against the Outer Space Treaty...


So?

Perhaps it's time to renegotiate that.


It's actually long past time, but it doesn't seem to be on anyone's
policy radar right now.

  #27  
Old July 3rd 06, 03:48 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
Herman Rubin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Worth The Mission?

In article ,
Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 03 Jul 2006 09:55:53 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Greg D.
Moore (Strider)" made the phosphor on
my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:


Forty acres on the moon might be a little more appealling, if it
weren't against the Outer Space Treaty...


So?


Perhaps it's time to renegotiate that.


It's actually long past time, but it doesn't seem to be on anyone's
policy radar right now.


Do you think that ANY government on Earth, including
US, wants individuals (not agents of governments) on
the Moon or anywhere else in space?


--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

  #28  
Old July 3rd 06, 06:19 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.moderated
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,999
Default Worth The Mission?

h (Rand Simberg) wrote:

On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 13:30:53 -0400, in a place far, far away,
(Derek Lyons) made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

(Rand Simberg) wrote:

My thoughts on whether or not to fly Shuttle, and the cult of
astronaut worship:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...UxNjE5MjM1OTE=

You only made one error - but it's the same one most space cadets
make. You fail to realize the 99% of *all* exploration is tooling
around in circles with what amounts to 'science fair' equipment.


For some values of "exploration," perhaps.


There are values of exploration other than "boldly going" Rand, which
is my point.

It's a creation of the media that leads people to believe that the
opposite is true. I won't say modern media - because the press of the
late 19th and early 20th century indulged heavily in the sport, ably
assisted by numerous 'explorers' who were shameless self promoters.
(Even if they did accomplish exploration that was actually useful, as
opposed to just stunts.)

There is an unhealthy tendency among a certain class of space
enthusiasts to define exploration as 'everything and anything *except*
what the Shuttle (and/or ISS) is doing'. This flies in the face of
reality - in which there is a great deal of scientific and exploratory
work done that *isn't* boldly going. And the general public, as well
as space enthusiasts, are mostly unaware beyond the occasional
accidents (USS Greeneville), or problems (potential breast cancer at
the South Pole).

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

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

 




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
NASA PDF - Apollo Experience Reports - 114 reports Rusty History 1 July 27th 05 03:52 AM
Nuclear-Powered Mission to Neptune Could Answer Questions About Planetary Formation [email protected] Astronomy Misc 2 December 10th 04 04:19 PM
NASA Selects Two 'New Frontiers' Mission Concepts For Further Study Ron Astronomy Misc 2 July 17th 04 01:09 AM
multiple launch moon mission vs. Single Launch moon missions Fred K. Policy 2 March 20th 04 03:29 PM
NASA Selects Explorer Mission Proposals For Feasibility Studies Ron Baalke Science 0 November 4th 03 11:14 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:46 PM.


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.