Multimillionaire's private space ship 'can land on Mars'

"In a statement released yesterday, Musk and SpaceX
also make the bold claim that the Dragon, once fitted
with modifications that the company is now developing
under NASA contract, would also be able to land "almost
anywhere on Earth or another planet with pinpoint
accuracy, overcoming the limitation of a winged
architecture that works only in Earth’s atmosphere"
(our emphasis)."

See:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04..._dragon_claim/

wrote:
See:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04..._dragon_claim/

Must be a typo in that URL, you sure it wasn't supposed to end with:

musk_mars_dragon_with_wild_claim

mars as in the verb form, not the proper noun?

Dave

On 22/04/2011 10:12 AM, David Spain wrote:
wrote:
See:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04..._dragon_claim/

Must be a typo in that URL, you sure it wasn't supposed to end with:

musk_mars_dragon_with_wild_claim

mars as in the verb form, not the proper noun?

Dave

What's this got to do with religion and priests?......

OH! I SEE! Dah! ;-)

On 4/21/2011 3:56 PM, wrote:
"In a statement released yesterday, Musk and SpaceX
also make the bold claim that the Dragon, once fitted
with modifications that the company is now developing
under NASA contract, would also be able to land "almost
anywhere on Earth or another planet with pinpoint
accuracy, overcoming the limitation of a winged
architecture that works only in Earth’s atmosphere"
(our emphasis)."

See:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04..._dragon_claim/

"Achievement of this capability by a company like SpaceX, which is not
yet nine years old and which only recently passed the 1,000-employee mark"
One of the main reasons it can keep it launches and development cost low
is due to its low number of employees - it's more like NACA than NASA.
United Space Alliance had around 5,600 people working on the Shuttle alone:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...off%2 0Notice
You add NASA personnel to that, and other contractors working on SRBs
and ETs, and you can see the amount of infrastructure in numbers of
people the Shuttle required.

Pat

On 4/21/2011 4:12 PM, David Spain wrote:
wrote:
See:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04..._dragon_claim/

Must be a typo in that URL, you sure it wasn't supposed to end with:

musk_mars_dragon_with_wild_claim

mars as in the verb form, not the proper noun?

I've seen that done many times; I at least call it Moon or Sun when I'm
referring to the specific object, and moon or sun if I'm referring to a
type of object.
Lunar still has me going as to whether its a proper noun or not.
And how about Earth, not as a planet, but referring to soil?

Pat

Le 22/04/11 01:56, a écrit :
"In a statement released yesterday, Musk and SpaceX
also make the bold claim that the Dragon, once fitted
with modifications that the company is now developing
under NASA contract, would also be able to land "almost
anywhere on Earth or another planet with pinpoint
accuracy, overcoming the limitation of a winged
architecture that works only in Earth’s atmosphere"
(our emphasis)."

See:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04..._dragon_claim/


It would be nice if all those multimillionaires would climb into
their spaceships and leave us alone for good.

Pat Flannery wrote:
Lunar still has me going as to whether its a proper noun or not.
And how about Earth, not as a planet, but referring to soil?

I spent my first 18 years in agriculture. Does that mean my
education was 'well-grounded'?

Dave

David Spain wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
Lunar still has me going as to whether its a proper noun or not.
And how about Earth, not as a planet, but referring to soil?

I spent my first 18 years in agriculture. Does that mean my
education was 'well-grounded'?

No, and bringing that up will only muddy things...

rick jones
--
No need to believe in either side, or any side. There is no cause.
There's only yourself. The belief is in your own precision. - Joubert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:56:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

"In a statement released yesterday, Musk and SpaceX
also make the bold claim that the Dragon, once fitted
with modifications that the company is now developing
under NASA contract, would also be able to land "almost
anywhere on Earth or another planet with pinpoint
accuracy, overcoming the limitation of a winged
architecture that works only in Earth’s atmosphere"
(our emphasis)."

Cool talking points, but a useless capability. How will Dragon take
off again from another planet, does it have a Falcon 9 in its back
pocket? The landing part of a future space mission to the Moon or Mars
will be done by a different spacecraft, not the one that hauled the
crew from Earth up to the Transfer Spacecraft. NASA planned Altair to
be its next lunar lander, not Orion or HL-20.

Now if SpaceX wants to built a fully-reusable version of Altair, I'm
all ears.

Brian

Fred J. McCall wrote:
Rick Jones wrote:

David Spain wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
Lunar still has me going as to whether its a proper noun or not.
And how about Earth, not as a planet, but referring to soil?

I spent my first 18 years in agriculture. Does that mean my
education was 'well-grounded'?

No, and bringing that up will only muddy things...


Don't be a clod...

Time to put this discussion back in the hopper...

rick jones
--
firebug n, the idiot who tosses a lit cigarette out his car window
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...