|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
Was it "about" science? Define "about"? The primary purpose obviously was Kennedy's charge. But there is no doubt science was done. A lot of science. While the early missions (11 especially) didn't have much time for training, all the astronauts had at least some training. According to the ALSJ it took Armstrong just less than eleven minutes from stepping on to the surface: 109:24:23 Armstrong: That's one small step for (a) man; one giant leap for mankind. to making geological (or selenological) observations, using words that most people don't know the meaning of: 109:35:08 Armstrong: Be advised that a lot of the rock samples out here - the hard rock samples - have what appear to be vesicles in the surface. Also, I am looking at one now that appears to have some sort of phenocrysts. And that was before Aldrin had even reached the surface. By Apollo 15 we've got two test pilots getting genuinely excited by rocks [1]: 145:42:41 Irwin: Oh, man! 145:42:41 Scott: Oh, boy! 145:42:42 Irwin: I got... 145:42:42 Scott: Look at that. 145:42:44 Irwin: Look at the glint! 145:42:45 Scott: Aaah. 145:42:46 Irwin: Almost see twinning in there! 145:42:47 Scott: Guess what we just found. (Jim laughs with pleasure) Guess what we just found! I think we found what we came for. 145:42:53 Irwin: Crystalline rock, huh? 145:42:55 Scott: Yes, sir. You better believe it. That's my preamble. I hope that we can all agree on two things: 1: A manned Mars mssion would be vastly more expensive than current robotic ones. 2: A manned Mars mission would generate scientific knowledge much much faster than current robotic ones. But if we can put aside our preferences and prejudices for a moment, how many robotic missions could be mounted for the cost of a manned one? And what would be the science output? [1] I wonder - Irwin, as LMP, says "man", and the CDR says "boy" - were they subconsciously echoing the command structure? |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
On May 24, 7:54*pm, "Greg \(Strider\) Moore"
wrote: "bob haller" *wrote in message ... By all means then Bob, tell us WHY a nuclear booster is needed. Bolden has stated publically regular chemical rockets arent good enough..... Is that good enough for you? No. Just because one person says something doesn't make it so. well ahh bolden is head of nasa. doesnt that count for something??? |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
On May 26, 10:27*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: On May 24, 7:54 pm, "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote: "bob haller" wrote in message .... By all means then Bob, tell us WHY a nuclear booster is needed. Bolden has stated publically regular chemical rockets arent good enough..... Is that good enough for you? No. Just because one person says something doesn't make it so. well ahh bolden is head of nasa. doesnt that count for something??? Apparently not even within his own organization, since NASA has preliminary plans for a manned Mars mission that use "regular chemical rockets". And I, for one, am still waiting for a cite of an actual quote where Bolden says that. *Your claim that "everyone knows" something merely leaves me convinced that you're making it up. -- "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the *truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *-- Thomas Jefferson nasa has had LOTS of man to mars plans..... Heres a question who came up with the very first nasa plan to mars and how would it have been powered...? |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
"Fevric J. Glandules" wrote in message ...
Greg (Strider) Moore wrote: Was it "about" science? Define "about"? The primary purpose obviously was Kennedy's charge. But there is no doubt science was done. A lot of science. While the early missions (11 especially) didn't have much time for training, all the astronauts had at least some training. According to the ALSJ it took Armstrong just less than eleven minutes from stepping on to the surface: 109:24:23 Armstrong: That's one small step for (a) man; one giant leap for mankind. to making geological (or selenological) observations, using words that most people don't know the meaning of: 109:35:08 Armstrong: Be advised that a lot of the rock samples out here - the hard rock samples - have what appear to be vesicles in the surface. Also, I am looking at one now that appears to have some sort of phenocrysts. And that was before Aldrin had even reached the surface. By Apollo 15 we've got two test pilots getting genuinely excited by rocks [1]: 145:42:41 Irwin: Oh, man! 145:42:41 Scott: Oh, boy! 145:42:42 Irwin: I got... 145:42:42 Scott: Look at that. 145:42:44 Irwin: Look at the glint! 145:42:45 Scott: Aaah. 145:42:46 Irwin: Almost see twinning in there! 145:42:47 Scott: Guess what we just found. (Jim laughs with pleasure) Guess what we just found! I think we found what we came for. 145:42:53 Irwin: Crystalline rock, huh? 145:42:55 Scott: Yes, sir. You better believe it. That's my preamble. I hope that we can all agree on two things: 1: A manned Mars mssion would be vastly more expensive than current robotic ones. 2: A manned Mars mission would generate scientific knowledge much much faster than current robotic ones. I would agree with both. And that robotic missions in both cases (Mars and the Moon) are preludes to manned landings. They help us learn more about the environment and pick some of the more interesting spots. I can speak for myself, I don't see it as an either/or or even an all/nothing. While we can't afford manned missions, let's due robotic. And let's gain more knowledge each time. But let's not delude ourselves (as some seem to be doing) into thinking robotic missions can replace manned missions. But if we can put aside our preferences and prejudices for a moment, how many robotic missions could be mounted for the cost of a manned one? And what would be the science output? To a certain extent, I bet not as much as one might think. [1] I wonder - Irwin, as LMP, says "man", and the CDR says "boy" - were they subconsciously echoing the command structure? -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
"bob haller" wrote in message
... On May 24, 7:54 pm, "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote: "bob haller" wrote in message ... By all means then Bob, tell us WHY a nuclear booster is needed. Bolden has stated publically regular chemical rockets arent good enough..... Is that good enough for you? No. Just because one person says something doesn't make it so. well ahh bolden is head of nasa. doesnt that count for something??? His word means more than yours, but doesn't mean "that's how things are going to happen." Not until the US elects a Supreme Dictator who dictates the space program. -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
well ahh bolden is head of nasa. doesnt that count for something??? His word means more than yours, but doesn't mean "that's how things are going to happen." *Not until the US elects a Supreme Dictator who dictates the space program. Greg D. Moore so there ill NEVER BE a manned mission to mars? I dont believe the US will ever be ruled by a Supreme Dictator, do you? |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
"bob haller" wrote in message
... well ahh bolden is head of nasa. doesnt that count for something??? His word means more than yours, but doesn't mean "that's how things are going to happen." Not until the US elects a Supreme Dictator who dictates the space program. Greg D. Moore so there ill NEVER BE a manned mission to mars? Bob, do you work hard at misunderstanding people? Seriously. That's not what I said. I dont believe the US will ever be ruled by a Supreme Dictator, do you? -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
the crew MUST eat, sleep, maintain the station, and theres no mars dust to deal with.... by the time you get a crew to mars there will be little time for exploring since they will be so busy doing all the required things to stay alive Right. Just like the astronauts on the Moon had no time to go on EVAs and perform science. Greg D. Moore *Crowdsourced Responses.http://www.quicr.net Its different for anyone to work hard for a day or two, with a forced rest before and after....... as skylab crews proved you cant force astronauts to work forever nat that pace....... and even apollo crews had to eat and sleep, they couldnt EVA 24/7 |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Drive on Opportunity
Did you see the news report that a mars mission using chemical rockets
will cause major health troubles by too much radiation exposure. that must be why bolden said cant be chemical rockets. some of the deep space radiation cant be easily stopped, the particles are too energetic...... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Liberals can't drive well either | Saul Levy | Misc | 0 | June 6th 06 12:42 AM |
NASA Announcement of Opportunity for the New Frontiers Program 2003and Missions of Opportunity | Alex R. Blackwell | Space Science Misc | 0 | October 10th 03 08:43 PM |
NASA Announcement of Opportunity for the New Frontiers Program 2003and Missions of Opportunity | Alex R. Blackwell | Science | 0 | October 10th 03 07:42 PM |
NASA Announcement of Opportunity for the New Frontiers Program 2003and Missions of Opportunity | Alex R. Blackwell | Technology | 0 | October 10th 03 07:42 PM |
Ion drive | bluherron | Misc | 5 | August 8th 03 11:34 PM |