|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
On Dec 10, 6:42*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: On Dec 9, 8:59*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: On Dec 9, 3:11*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: Florida does not have any silos You are absolutely wrong, there are many silos either in KSC , or the attached military base. Fact is it was called silo road. Uh, there's one there; 31B. *There's a second one at an abandoned Aerojet facility near Miami that has and old solid booster that was never developed sitting in it. The remains of challenger were entombed in one of those silos. So now there are none that don't have something in them. *And they weren't 'entombed'. *They were just put in there. *'Entombed' implies they were sealed up and going to stay there forever. I believe there were 20 or 30, they used to be visible on google earth, but sometime ago that entire area was obscured, no doubt for security reasons What you believe and the state of our present reality seem frequently to be at odds. *This would appear to be another of those cases. Oh, and I just looked at Google Earth and nothing is "obscured". There are lots of launch sites for various things (Wikipedia even has a map), but no vast field of silos. the challenger was entombed since a large concrete cap was poured over the silos entrance. 'Placed', not 'poured', you idiot. *Go look at the pictures. *A crane can lift that back off. "Hugh W. Harris, a spokesman at the Kennedy Space Center, said all the boxes of shuttle debris had been catalogued and would be stored so that they could be retrieved in case they were needed as evidence in any lawsuits or for any subsequence investigations of the causes of the accident." *-- NY Times. I suspect that siol is flooded since there is no way to maintain any pumps inside it You always 'suspect' all sorts of silly ****, Bobbert. *Virtually none of it seems to actually match our present reality. well it really doesnt matter, challenger is for all intents and purposes in that silo, which is likely flooded being so close to the ocean with that concrete cap theres no easy way to maintain any pumps...... at least the columbia debris are accesible for research and some for display So once again you were talking ****e and when you get your nose rubbed in reality, it turns out "it really doesn't matter". Bobbert, have someone show you what a clue looks like.... -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar *territory." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn well at least you now agree challenger is in a abandoned silo.....???? one you denied existed |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
On Dec 10, 9:18*am, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article 887436f6-4df8-441e-889f-bd87cf201ed6 @r20g2000yql.googlegroups.com, says... bob haller wrote: You are absolutely wrong, there are many silos either in KSC , or the attached military base. Fact is it was called silo road. well at least you now agree challenger is in a abandoned silo.....???? That was never the point and you know it. one you denied existed You're straying far and wide of your original claim. *You claimed there were *many* silos in Florida. *There are not "many" silos in Florida. Furthermore, the ones that are there have not been used for launches in a *long* time. On top of that, even if there was a silo in Florida that was "ready for use", an ICBM silo is not suitable for launching any of today's orbital launch vehicles. *There would be *no* point in putting a launch vehicle in a silo, unless your goal was to **** away money for no reason at all. Jeff -- Well a launcher in a silo is supper secure not only from terrorists but more importandly weather. the vehicle may not like freezing weather but snug and warm in a silo it could still be launched. with all the work level platforms in a silo should make some pad rat jobs easier, no weather like cold and rain or ice to deal with..... |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
On Dec 9, 12:45*pm, bob haller wrote:
Florida does not have any silos You are absolutely wrong, there are many silos either in KSC , or the attached military base. Fact is it was called silo road. Wrong, idiot. I work theyre A. There are no silos on KSC B. There were two silos for Minuteman on CCAFS, but those have been sealed and one has Challenger in it. c. There is no Silo road |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
On Dec 9, 12:45*pm, bob haller wrote:
I believe there were 20 or 30, they used to be visible on google earth, but sometime ago that entire area was obscured, no doubt for security reasons That is a joke. There are only 2 |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
Why not just admit that your "silo" idea is a bad idea? Jeff like everything in life silo has advantages and disadvantages.... the big disadvantage is cost. however silos are virtually indestructible, other than a direct nuke bomb hit the vehicle could remain stacked forever weather wouldnt matter. a launch could even occur during a quick break in otherwise unlanchable weather service platforms would make doing things easy for workers Since the military has used it forever the technology is easily understood |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 12:16:14 AM UTC-5, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: On Dec 10, 9:18*am, Jeff Findley wrote: In article 887436f6-4df8-441e-889f-bd87cf201ed6 @r20g2000yql.googlegroups.com, says... bob haller wrote: You are absolutely wrong, there are many silos either in KSC , or the attached military base. Fact is it was called silo road. well at least you now agree challenger is in a abandoned silo.....???? That was never the point and you know it. one you denied existed You're straying far and wide of your original claim. *You claimed there were *many* silos in Florida. *There are not "many" silos in Florida.. Furthermore, the ones that are there have not been used for launches in a *long* time. On top of that, even if there was a silo in Florida that was "ready for use", an ICBM silo is not suitable for launching any of today's orbital launch vehicles. *There would be *no* point in putting a launch vehicle in a silo, unless your goal was to **** away money for no reason at all. Well a launcher in a silo is supper secure not only from terrorists but more importandly weather. the vehicle may not like freezing weather but snug and warm in a silo it could still be launched. with all the work level platforms in a silo should make some pad rat jobs easier, no weather like cold and rain or ice to deal with..... And so you show that you are too ignorant to even have a discussion with. -- "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 I have yet to see anyone who really agrees with any of Bob's contentions or statements. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
As I predicted, space X to get military contracts:)
On Dec 10, 8:08*pm, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article 68ed152f-b291-43d3-b880- , says... Why not just admit that your "silo" idea is a bad idea? like everything in life silo has advantages and disadvantages.... the big disadvantage is cost. That's not the only disadvantage... however silos are virtually indestructible, other than a direct nuke bomb hit the vehicle could remain stacked forever Sure, if you're willing to accept ICBM reliability. *Better have two or three "ready to go" to make sure at least one makes it to ISS. Disadvantage: *launcher sitting in a silo for an indeterminate amount of time before launch. weather wouldnt matter. a launch could even occur during a quick break in otherwise unlanchable weather Again, the Russians have launched in weather that's rather extreme. *In an emergency, other launch sites could no doubt be used with other ISS resupply vehicles that are in the pipeline. service platforms would make doing things easy for workers Since the military has used it forever the technology is easily understood Other than the fact that the truly useful bits of technology are likely to be classified. *But I suppose you'll just wave your magic wand and make that issue go away as well, since you seem to think silo launches are so easy. Jeff -- "the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer Russia launches in the winter. snowstorms not really a issue at KSC. plus as I said before the silo launchers would be rotated in for routine resupplys, so they wouldnt get stale..... and if there were 3 on stand by that might be better than existing resupply vehicles that may not be ready at a moments notice. many posters here try to discredit me, like they did before columbia when I asked about a shuttle stuck at station. and was called chicken little, a shuttle couldnt get stuck in orbit etc etc....... clearly all of you who claimed that were dead wrong |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Military Space Plane = Space life boat? | David E. Powell | Space Shuttle | 247 | December 9th 09 06:20 AM |
Around the world, organized military forces of governments have manydifferent types of military uniforms that they wear. Clearly being one of thefounding fathers of the uniform, the militaries of countries have contributedgreatly towards what constit | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | April 20th 08 06:44 PM |
A New Military Space Age | Rand Simberg | Policy | 6 | January 23rd 07 03:17 PM |
A New Military Space Age | Rand Simberg | History | 6 | January 23rd 07 03:17 PM |
Predicted space progress | Kevin McCarthy | Policy | 4 | January 9th 04 05:40 AM |