Defense Industry Defense Industry    FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I Threa Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next          Defense Industry Forum Index -> Defense Industry View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Henry Spencer Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 6:41 am    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T In article <465fd06c.91365125@news.supernews.com>, Derek Lyons <fairwater@gmail.com> wrote: Quote: Yeah, generally not a good sign when you start 3000 lbs overweight and you haven't even bent metal yet. Yeah. Very few programs ever have weight problems during development - think how much trouble NASA would have been in had the CSM and LEM turned out to be overweight. Oh, wait. They did. The difference is that Apollo had serious overweight problems -- beyond the available margins -- *much* later in the project. To run into serious weight problems so early might conceivably indicate that they're so much more on top of things that they can see the problem coming much farther ahead. Unfortunately, it's much more likely that their initial concept simply had grossly inadequate margins, and so they're in flashing-red-light-OVERWEIGHT territory at a time when Apollo's more cautious design was still comfortably safe. The really bad part is, they've already had to shake up the design two or three times to add more margin. Diminishing returns set in fairly quickly if you keep doing that. What's going to happen when *they're* at the point where Apollo hit real mass trouble, and have much less room to maneuver because they've already squeezed the design as hard as they can? -- spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. | henry@spsystems.net Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor robert casey Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 9:59 am    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Quote: We are considerably more sophisticated than that now. We don't need a truck, we need a taxi. We can't afford another Apollo. Depends on what we want to do up there on the Moon. We already did the flags and footprints... Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Pat Flannery Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 2:33 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T kT wrote: Quote: Griffin is just adding the steroids (SRBs), it's still Apollo. We are considerably more sophisticated than that now. Yeah, but our rocket technology ain't. Quote: We don't need a truck, we need a taxi. We can't afford another Apollo. I seriously doubt if we'll have to deal with that problem, comes November of 2008. ;-) Pat Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor JF Mezei Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 3:10 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Pat Flannery wrote: Quote: I seriously doubt if we'll have to deal with that problem, comes November of 2008. ;-) There has been a significant number of people in and around NASA who have been poo-pooing the shuttle sufficiently to convince the current administration to kill the shuttle and replace it with some toy just so they aren't seen as killing manned space programme alltogether. Come January 2009 with a new administration takes power, unless NASA and the people around it start to make much positive noise about extending the shuttle's lifetime, extenting shuttle will be hard to justify. That leaves continuing that useless CEV thing, or starting yet another project. (Perhaps Shuttle2 ?). If the government set a clear goal of going to mars, then NASA could then make specific steps that would be needed to succeed in that endeavour, from being able to assemble a new space station (expedition ship) in LEO , and that might include a new shuttle or new launchers with automated berthing capabilities. It may also include hard decisions to give up on developing a Soyuz lookalike and just buy them from the Russians and focus instead on a mars lander and mars launcher to get back to the expedition ship in orbit around mars. It might also include developing and testing aerobraking systems. (and perhaps that might involve a free-return trajectory around moon to get back to earth at high speed to test aerobraking to get to LEO and dock with space station. etc etc etc. When JFK set the goal of going to the moon, NASA had a clear plan of steps necessary (goin to orbit and back, doing EVA, docking 2 vehicles etc). The same focus is needed to move NASA forwards. If it keeps going back and forth on a launcher from earth (as has been the case since the 1990s), it will get nowhere. DX-C X-33, CEV etc. If it has specific goals to reach, it is easier to reach them. And if you don't yet have the technology, then you work on it until you do have it. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Pat Flannery Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 3:13 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Henry Spencer wrote: Quote: The difference is that Apollo had serious overweight problems -- beyond the available margins -- *much* later in the project. But it's like weight creep on the X-20 Dyna-Soar - it's never going to actually fly, so who really cares how overweight it gets? :-D Pat Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Pat Flannery Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 3:54 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T JF Mezei wrote: Quote: If the government set a clear goal of going to mars, then NASA could then make specific steps that would be needed to succeed in that endeavour, from being able to assemble a new space station (expedition ship) in LEO , and that might include a new shuttle or new launchers with automated berthing capabilities. How about we just ditch LEO/HEO/Lunar manned spaceflight, and get around to exploring our solar system? We can do that on a budget, and learn great stuff. If we want to send people somewhere, we can do it around 50 years from now; it's not like the Moon or Mars are going to be much different in 2057 than they are in 2007. Pat Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Pat Flannery Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 4:29 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Pat Flannery wrote: Quote: But it's like weight creep on the X-20 Dyna-Soar - it's never going to actually fly, so who really cares how overweight it gets? :-D Pat You know, I'd have loved to see them take the final Dyna-Soar and stick it on top of that Titan I with the big added fins, as originally intended. I picture the launch going something like this: The Titan I/Dyna-Soar cranks up to full thrust on the pad. Around five seconds later, as propellant usage on the Titan I allows thrust to exceed overall stack mass, the thing claws slowly skyward. Titan stage one expends its propellants at around twenty thousand feet, with the stack moving at around 2,000 mph. Titan stage two ignites, propelling the Dyna-Soar upwards to well over 200,000 feet and around Mach 4. Dyna-Soar separates from Titan stage two and fires its solid fuel escape rocket, adding a further Mach in the process. Dyna-Soar coasts up to 400,000 feet, and begins its reentry maneuvers. Scott Crossfield glide lands Dyna-Soar; says it's "Not that really different from bringing a X-15 home." Air Force applauds Dyna-Soar and Crossfield: "Safe and easy to handle!" "Test pilot praises Dyna-Soar!" "New era in space exploration has begun!", demands Titan IIIs, and 5 billion dollars to follow up on successful flight. ;-) Pat Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Fred J. McCall Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 5:53 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Pat Flannery <flanner@daktel.com> wrote: : :How about we just ditch LEO/HEO/Lunar manned spaceflight, and get around :to exploring our solar system? :We can do that on a budget, and learn great stuff. : So what 'great stuff' do we learn that we need to know if we're not going? : :If we want to send people somewhere, we can do it around 50 years from :now; it's not like the Moon or Mars are going to be much different in :2057 than they are in 2007. : So why spend the money to 'learn great stuff' about them until we're ready to go? -- "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute." -- Charles Pinckney Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor kT Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 5:55 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T JF Mezei wrote: Quote: Pat Flannery wrote: I seriously doubt if we'll have to deal with that problem, comes November of 2008. ;-) There has been a significant number of people in and around NASA who have been poo-pooing the shuttle sufficiently to convince the current administration to kill the shuttle and replace it with some toy just so they aren't seen as killing manned space programme alltogether. Come January 2009 with a new administration takes power, unless NASA and the people around it start to make much positive noise about extending the shuttle's lifetime, extenting shuttle will be hard to justify. That leaves continuing that useless CEV thing, or starting yet another project. (Perhaps Shuttle2 ?). If the government set a clear goal of going to mars, then NASA could then make specific steps that would be needed to succeed in that endeavour, from being able to assemble a new space station (expedition ship) in LEO , and that might include a new shuttle or new launchers with automated berthing capabilities. It may also include hard decisions to give up on developing a Soyuz lookalike and just buy them from the Russians and focus instead on a mars lander and mars launcher to get back to the expedition ship in orbit around mars. It might also include developing and testing aerobraking systems. (and perhaps that might involve a free-return trajectory around moon to get back to earth at high speed to test aerobraking to get to LEO and dock with space station. etc etc etc. When JFK set the goal of going to the moon, NASA had a clear plan of steps necessary (goin to orbit and back, doing EVA, docking 2 vehicles etc). The same focus is needed to move NASA forwards. If it keeps going back and forth on a launcher from earth (as has been the case since the 1990s), it will get nowhere. DX-C X-33, CEV etc. If it has specific goals to reach, it is easier to reach them. And if you don't yet have the technology, then you work on it until you do have it. Ceres - The Fifth Planet From A Star Called The Sun. http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=302 -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor kT Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 5:57 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Pat Flannery wrote: Quote: kT wrote: Griffin is just adding the steroids (SRBs), it's still Apollo. We are considerably more sophisticated than that now. Yeah, but our rocket technology ain't. Maybe your's isn't, but mine is. You're still living in the 50's. Quote: We don't need a truck, we need a taxi. We can't afford another Apollo. I seriously doubt if we'll have to deal with that problem, comes November of 2008. ;-) So you think all of America's problems will all just 'go away'? Ok, so you're delusional too. You are an American, no? -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Jim Davis Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 8:30 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T kT wrote: Quote: Which is why my SSME SSTO test vehicle, the Delta V, routinely gets me to orbit pulling less than 8 gees with easily attainable mass fractions and plenty of fuel to spare. <chuckle> You left out the part where Bill Gates hands you a blank check, the Democrats nominate you for President, and Jessica Alba wants to have your baby. Jim Davis Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Pat Flannery Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 8:44 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Fred J. McCall wrote: Quote: Pat Flannery <flanner@daktel.com> wrote: : :How about we just ditch LEO/HEO/Lunar manned spaceflight, and get around :to exploring our solar system? :We can do that on a budget, and learn great stuff. : So what 'great stuff' do we learn that we need to know if we're not going? We just might be going...say a few decades down the line. Impatience is the eternal curse of America. "Want it now! Want it right now!" is the perfect description of a spoiled four-year-old. Pat Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor kT Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 8:50 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Pat Flannery wrote: Quote: "Want it now! Want it right now!" How long was the Hubble space telescope up before they finally got around to imaging Ceres? Ignorance is the eternal state of America. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Pat Flannery Guest Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 8:52 pm    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T kT wrote: Quote: Maybe your's isn't, but mine is. You're still living in the 50's. Show me a technology that gives us a order of magnitude increase in ISP...because if you can't do that, all you're doing is blowing rose-smelling farts out of your ass while you're dreaming. Pat Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor kT Guest Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:00 am    Post subject: Re: NASAspaceflight.com - Censors the John Young - Ares I T Pat Flannery wrote: Quote: kT wrote: Maybe your's isn't, but mine is. You're still living in the 50's. Show me a technology that gives us a order of magnitude increase in ISP...because if you can't do that, all you're doing is blowing rose-smelling farts out of your ass while you're dreaming. Which is why my SSME SSTO test vehicle, the Delta V, routinely gets me to orbit pulling less than 8 gees with easily attainable mass fractions and plenty of fuel to spare. SRBs are what produce rose smelling farts. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         Defense Industry Forum Index -> Defense Industry All times are GMT Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next Page 3 of 4   Jump to: Select a forum Defense Industry----------------Defense Industry  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Australian Debt Consolidation Experts medical insurance Wedding Invitation Escort, massaggiatrici e accompagnatrici a Modena, Bologna, Parma, Brescia, Vicenza ... UK Telephone Sex Software mortgage quotations Make Your Own Website Cheap phone calls to Poland Cleaning Service mold killer UK Swingers Genuine Contacts Site cleaning supplies Vacuum Cleaner Bags 122 Attacks blocked Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group