Another successful SpaceX launch and landing

On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:38:14 AM UTC+12, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,
says...
You are a Mookjacking ****. Nobody is obligated to follow your leaps
of illogic.


How logical is it to complain about no one wanting to participate in your group here, while at the same time attacking an obviously knowledgeable capable person active in the field?


That wouldn't be logical at all. Only two things wrong with your
thesis:

1) I haven't complained about anything.

2) I've 'attacked' you, you Mookjacking ****, not "an obviously
knowledgeable capable person active in the field".


I tend to agree with Fred on this one.

That's a surprise.

Several replies back, Mook said
"The thread is about mission planning for a Mars trip.",

Correct. I detailed the three replies that led to that.

but clearly the
subject line says otherwise.

That doesn't change the fact that others mentioned the well-known facts

1) that SpaceX's long term goal is Mars colonisation,
2) that reusable rockets to reduce costs are part of that plan,
3) that others in the thread for this reason wondered about orbiting propellant depots,
4) that those depots might be used for Mars mission,

at that point I;

5) posted detailed information from early mission planning studies
6) analysed them with respect to SpaceX capabilities,

It would be best if new topics were
introduced as new posts, not as a follow-up to an existing topic.

That's a matter of taste. Had the people who introduced orbital depots and their use for Mars mission planning done that, I wouldn't have a problem with that. Your remarks directed at me, should be directed at them.

The
Mookjacking followed quickly by Mook on Mook on Mook action gets a bit
tiresome since it inevitably kills the original thread topic.

I supplied references in support of my comments. It sounds like you don't want to have real aerospace literature appear in your group.


Unfortunately, Mook has yet to learn, the now admittedly somewhat
antiquated, art of Nettiquette as it applies to Usenet Newsgroups.

This comment itself, along with your racist family name shaming and name calling is beyond the pale compared to the non-issue of me responding with mission planning literature and discussing how intelligent planning at the target planet reduces the amount of propellant required on orbit in a depot.

Here is a reference straight from Zen and the Art of the Internet:

Usenet News
https://www.cs.indiana.edu/docprojec...zen-1.0_6.html

Jeff

Your attempts to shame me based on my name and my background show you are the person you are defending are the agressor. You just don't want me to post here and no matter what I say here you will find reason to shame me and denigrate me. No matter what I say.

The fact is in this case, there were three replies to the original post that led directly to a discussion of orbital fuel depots on orbit that might support a mission to Mars. This requires ZBO technology if cryogens are to be used. I posted documents on that. This also is a feature in Mars mission planning. I posted articles on that. I also used the information reference in those articles to discuss the specific capabilities and capacities of the Falcon Heavy to support Mars missions which is the long-term goal of SpaceX and one reason SpaceX is developing reusable launchers in the first place.

--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.