#41
|
|||
|
|||
t/Space approach seems great - much better than current CEVs. However,
it appears that if both were to go ahead, the only advantage would be the benefit of not man rating the CEVs. There would be benefits if there was a low orbit space shed to be used for mission assembley, but the thinking towards a HLV means that's not needed. Perhaps for a Biglow hotel? Ideally, ESA should buy the concept, but it's not invented in France. Have you by any chance come across the vehicle performance and stage mass figures? If this isdeveloped, it could be a compettive way of launching small payloads to LEO. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
On 2005-06-29, Alex Terrell wrote:
What *have* you been drinking? The Apollo CM/LM tunnel was about 75cm in diameter, and was passable to a suited astronaut (as witness Dave Scott's stand-up EVA in the LM docking hatch on Apollo 15). Perhaps NASA now has a representative recruitment policy - Astronauts need to reflect today's population, not the population of 35 years ago. So supersize that airlock! Heh. On a slightly more serious note, "95th percentile" gets kicked around quite a bit here. Does anyone have numbers on what a 95th percentile adult male is currently considered to be? The numbers I found last time I looked seemed quite low (6'2"!), and on examination looked like they dated back to the early sixties... -- -Andrew Gray |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
My Child's (UK) health record book levels off at 19 years with
99.6th: 196 cm 98th: 191 cm 91st: 186 cm 75th: 182 cm 50th: 177 cm 25th: 173 cm 9th: 168 cm 2nd: 164 cm Our German health book only goes up to 5 years, but it appears that German kids are slightly taller. I'd expect a higher deviation in the US population due to a more diverse ethnic mix. The Russians once made excellent, cheap tanks. One of their secrets was to size them for something like the 5th or 10th percentile only. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Alex Terrell wrote:
The Russians once made excellent, cheap tanks. One of their secrets was to size them for something like the 5th or 10th percentile only. The don't think the words "excellent" and "Russian" should never be used together in regards to a tank. They made easily mass producable tanks that didn't cost a fortune, had admirably low silhouettes and were fairly serviceable; but even the vaunted T-34 had poor uncoated optics on its sighting system, and a lot of later designs proved very vulnerable in combat- as well as having problems like the T-62's tendency to throw treads, and the T-72's autoloader's ability to remove parts of the turret crew's bodies. Of course they were better than a Sheridan, but hell, even a Sherman may have been better than a Sheridan. I still wish they had continued down this road of tank design: http://milparade.udm.ru/25/100.htm The extrapolation of that concept to the 1990's would have been fascinating to behold. Completely worthless from a military point of view, but fun to see in May Day parades. :-) Pat |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
"Douglas Holmes" wrote in message
... "Jim Kingdon" wrote in message news There's one expected this afternoon. I assume this is the one: http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2005...ontractor.html In a nutshell, they picked two contractors to compete for a down-selection in 2006 (which is sooner than had been previously planned). Moving up the down-selection has been widely reported for some months now. Is that what was expected or is there more? The most interesting line for me was: NASA's Vision for Space Exploration calls for the CEV to carry up to six astronauts beyond low-Earth orbit soon after the Space Shuttle is retired in 2010, and then on to the moon as early as 2015. When did the CEV become a SIX man vehicle? About the same time the Russian Kilper announced 2 pilots and 4 crew ! Last week the Europeans mentioend they may assist the Russians with the design/build, etc. gb Helps explain the size increase from 20 to 30 tons. Yes, in part - it does. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Cuddihy" wrote in message
ups.com... kert wrote: So why exactly is launching six astronauts in one vehicle better than launching three astronauts in two vehicles at the same time ? Since when has putting all eggs in one basket, or launcher in this case, become a wise practice ? -kert Congress has made it pretty clear during the past two shuttle explosions that loss of astronaut life is NOT acceptable. If one of the two four person launches failed, ALL missions would be on hold. Just think about it. If you launch two three person crews to orbit, where they have to transfer to a 6-person lunar CEV, you need to have launched 3 vehicles to LEO just to get the crew in a CEV. IF each of the four person CXVs is 15 tons, and the lunar CEV is still 30 tons, you still have to launch 60 tons to LEO to get the passengers into a 30 ton CEV. If, on the other hand, you launch one 30 ton CEV, it can be launched from earth with all the passegers on board. Doesn't that make a lot more sense? When I hear this line of reason ... I am quickly reminded that this is the same line of reasoning in 1960s for the Saturn V usage for Apollo program's lunar missions .. ... rather than multiple Saturn 1B launches .... gb |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Andrew Gray wrote:
Heh. On a slightly more serious note, "95th percentile" gets kicked around quite a bit here. Does anyone have numbers on what a 95th percentile adult male is currently considered to be? The numbers I found last time I looked seemed quite low (6'2"!), and on examination looked like they dated back to the early sixties... Anecdotally - I'm 6'3" and spend a lot of time at social dances, where everyone is standing up so it's easy to compare. When looking around a room with several hundred couples on the floor, I typically see 1-2 people my height or above. So 95th %ile sounds about right. ISTR that the average height in the US has actually been decreasing a bit recently, perhaps due to immigration and overall aging of the population. Jon __@/ |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Jon Leech wrote:
Andrew Gray wrote: Heh. On a slightly more serious note, "95th percentile" gets kicked around quite a bit here. Does anyone have numbers on what a 95th percentile adult male is currently considered to be? The numbers I found last time I looked seemed quite low (6'2"!), and on examination looked like they dated back to the early sixties... Anecdotally - I'm 6'3" and spend a lot of time at social dances, where everyone is standing up so it's easy to compare. When looking around a room with several hundred couples on the floor, I typically see 1-2 people my height or above. So 95th %ile sounds about right. ISTR that the average height in the US has actually been decreasing a bit recently, perhaps due to immigration and overall aging of the population. US population charts: http://www.halls.md/chart/men-height-w.htm (white men, over age range) http://www.halls.md/chart/men-height-b.htm (black men, over age range) http://www.halls.md/chart/men-height-h.htm (hispanic men, over age range) http://www.halls.md/chart/men-height-o.htm (other men, over age range) I don't personally care so much about 95th percentile; every vehicle I design has to fit me, and I'm 6'4.5", and probably should fit my brother, who's 6'5" and 300 lb of muchly muscle. And most of them have to fit my wife, who's 4'11". -george william herbert |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
George William Herbert wrote:
every vehicle I design has to fit me, and I'm 6'4.5", And most of them have to fit my wife, who's 4'11". The two of you must make an impressive couple on the dance floor. :-) Jim Davis |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
George William Herbert wrote:
I don't personally care so much about 95th percentile; every vehicle I design has to fit me, and I'm 6'4.5", and probably should fit my brother, who's 6'5" and 300 lb of muchly muscle. And most of them have to fit my wife, who's 4'11". Well, just stack your astronauts head to toe instead of side-by-side, and you and your wife should do just fine :-) Jon __@/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hubble Webcast Announcement | Lucy Albert | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | March 18th 05 06:44 PM |
ANNOUNCEMENT: New Glass for optics | CLT | UK Astronomy | 4 | April 2nd 04 09:00 PM |
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 |