|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
$110 Million to Retire?
Don't you wish you could be paid $110 million to retire like NASA's DART Mission? And if successful it was only supposed to last twenty-four hours before expending battery life and fuel? For $110 million it better last longer than that. http://www.space.com/missionlaunches...ch_050415.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Von Fourche" wrote in message
ink.net... Don't you wish you could be paid $110 million to retire like NASA's DART Mission? And if successful it was only supposed to last twenty-four hours before expending battery life and fuel? For $110 million it better last longer than that. http://www.space.com/missionlaunches...ch_050415.html At least the L-1011 landed safely. gb |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Von Fourche" wrote in
ink.net: Don't you wish you could be paid $110 million to retire like NASA's DART Mission? And if successful it was only supposed to last twenty-four hours before expending battery life and fuel? For $110 million it better last longer than that. http://www.space.com/missionlaunches...ch_050415.html Gee, if we only knew in advance which spacecraft would succeed and which would fail, then we could only fund the successful ones and save the money! Moron. plonk -- JRF Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail, check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and think one step ahead of IBM. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Jorge R. Frank" wrote Gee, if we only knew in advance which spacecraft would succeed and which would fail, then we could only fund the successful ones and save the money! And if we knew which rendezvous missions were going to intrude into the 'Mcdivitt Quadrant', we could shoot the designers pre-launch and re-hire MIT's CSDL. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Von Fourche wrote: Don't you wish you could be paid $110 million to retire like NASA's DART Mission? And if successful it was only supposed to last twenty-four hours before expending battery life and fuel? For $110 million it better last longer than that. http://www.space.com/missionlaunches...ch_050415.html Remember that fuss in the Senate a couple of months back regarding the secret satellite project to sneak stealth satellites up to foreign ones where they would give them the once-over and disable them if wished? DART sounds a lot like step one of that program. Pat |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Jorge R. Frank wrote: Gee, if we only knew in advance which spacecraft would succeed and which would fail, then we could only fund the successful ones and save the money! At least they _say_ it's dead....but now that the stealth cover has extended itself, the ion engines have kicked in, and the tiny 5 mm recoilless machine gun has been armed....well...let's just say that the owners of any satellites broadcasting Al-Jazeera might want to check up on their insurance status... ;-) Pat |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Pat Flannery wrote: Von Fourche wrote: Don't you wish you could be paid $110 million to retire like NASA's DART Mission? And if successful it was only supposed to last twenty-four hours before expending battery life and fuel? For $110 million it better last longer than that. http://www.space.com/missionlaunches...ch_050415.html Remember that fuss in the Senate a couple of months back regarding the secret satellite project to sneak stealth satellites up to foreign ones where they would give them the once-over and disable them if wished? DART sounds a lot like step one of that program. XSS-11, a similar DoD project that apparently hasn't failed, is more likely to be that step than DART, which is a NASA program. It would be amazingly hard, if not impossible, to hide a secret project via. NASA. - Ed Kyle |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Kyle wrote: XSS-11, a similar DoD project that apparently hasn't failed, is more likely to be that step than DART, which is a NASA program. It would be amazingly hard, if not impossible, to hide a secret project via. NASA. Read "The Corona Project" sometime...hide in plain site. Once the taped-on craft paper comes off of the Canaveral launched Discover satellites camera aperture, they amazingly transform into recon sats during first stage burn. Besides, nowadays who gives a hoot in hell about even disguising a military purpose for our space program's military attachments? Frankly, I don't really have a problem with designing something along the lines of the old SAINT program- it's a non-nuclear capability that might act as a deterrent to war....the Chinese have already realized the military aspects of satellites and satellite negation in the modern world: http://www.spacewar.com/news/cyberwar-05j.html Pat |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In message , Pat Flannery
writes Jorge R. Frank wrote: Gee, if we only knew in advance which spacecraft would succeed and which would fail, then we could only fund the successful ones and save the money! At least they _say_ it's dead....but now that the stealth cover has extended itself, the ion engines have kicked in, and the tiny 5 mm recoilless machine gun has been armed....well...let's just say that the owners of any satellites broadcasting Al-Jazeera might want to check up on their insurance status... ;-) Quite so. One wouldn't want to see both sides of a story. -- Remove spam and invalid from address to reply. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Pat Flannery wrote:
Read "The Corona Project" sometime...hide in plain site. Once the taped-on craft paper comes off of the Canaveral launched Discover satellites camera aperture, they amazingly transform into recon sats during first stage burn. Are you sure *you* read "The Corona Project"? All CORONA missions were launched from Vandenberg, all were launched by the DoD, NASA had no connection. Jim Davis |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
$110 Million To Retire | Von Fourche | Misc | 0 | April 16th 05 06:59 PM |
cheap access to space - majority opinion | Cameron Dorrough | Technology | 15 | June 27th 04 03:35 AM |
Bechtel Nevada: Control of the World's Largest Nuclear Weapons Facilities | * | Astronomy Misc | 0 | May 2nd 04 05:29 PM |
Heavy Lift launcher is allready here | serge | Policy | 27 | February 13th 04 07:03 PM |
Earth's birth date turned back: Formed earlier than believed (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | July 17th 03 11:28 PM |