Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#4462117 - 02/20/19 11:53 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Zamzow Offline
Member
Zamzow  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Oops, said 9 manned lunar landings, forgot my facts there...

It was 6...

But SLS and Orion are indeed partly designed for a potential manned Mars mission. And for other things.

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4462123 - 02/20/19 12:52 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,619
CyBerkut Offline
Administrator
CyBerkut  Offline
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,619
Florida
Go to Mars to stay there, not just visit. Send supplies, etc. ahead of time.

Some ships stay to be support mechanisms, or even a life boat. Other ships return to Earth to be reloaded with people/supplies and sent to Mars again.

People staying on Mars, whether permanently or for some tour of duty, work their butts off to establish habitat(s) and do science.

It's not easy, but it is do-able. There are plenty of people who want to go, and enough of them are probably skilled/suited enough to make it work. Robotics will be a key to making it more feasible.

#4462125 - 02/20/19 01:02 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,383
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,383
Miami, FL USA
A Mars colonization will eventually happen but not in my lifetime. smile


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4462126 - 02/20/19 01:04 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,712
Dart Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Dart  Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Lifer

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,712
Alabaster, AL USA
I think one has to adjust expectations on what NASA does and can do now versus the heyday of the Mercury-Apollo era.

The Moon program was the right program at the right time, jump starting the technological timeline from tube to transistor technology. The economic rewards from the spin-off technology underwritten by NASA simply can't be understated.

Hell, as a kid in the early 1970's we had a black and white TV that had tubes in the back of it. Yes, it was a bit of a relic, but while rare at that time not exactly shocking to discover. There were still TV repairmen that would make house calls for them.

The Moon program was about making a technological leap, with the fundamental tools for that leap just within grasping range. We had radar; making microwaves a medium for communication rather than location finder was a concept that was understood, but unfunded (for an example). The Moon program did this, and now we have cell phones.

Huge jumps like this are very, very rare in human history. This is a Bessemer refining the way to mass produce steel of high and consistent quality event, one we take for granted.

Still, it's not like NASA has been resting on their laurels. We think nothing of having our portable devices tracking their position down to a few yards thanks to GPS, but 25 years ago this was still a dream. I remember very well standing in the desert in 1990 while the new fangled box sought a third satellite to obtain a location - and this was only available to the military. We didn't even refer to it as GPS...we talked in terms of the name of the receiver.

Both the Europeans and the Russians are struggling today to replicate the US GPS system.

Yes, tons of money are going to be spent on ground systems for the next generation of rockets. One either does this or later laughs at NASA for having 1970's or '80's tech in the control centers. Hell, the Space Shuttle's computers were criminally out of date at the end of the program's life and was subject to much conversation.

If a return to the Moon were the only goal, we could do that in pretty short order. It's not like we've forgotten how to make the Saturn V rocket, after all. Heck, we do maintenance on a big bunches of a variation of the same thing in our ICBM program.

NASA's mandate is a bit broader, and because of it a bit muddier. SpaceX is a single purpose program; the same can't be said of NASA.


The opinions of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

More dumb stuff at http://www.darts-page.com

From Laser:
"The forum is the place where combat (real time) flight simulator fans come to play turn based strategy combat."
#4462133 - 02/20/19 02:13 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: CyBerkut]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
SC
Originally Posted by CyBerkut
Go to Mars to stay there, not just visit. Send supplies, etc. ahead of time.

Some ships stay to be support mechanisms, or even a life boat. Other ships return to Earth to be reloaded with people/supplies and sent to Mars again.

People staying on Mars, whether permanently or for some tour of duty, work their butts off to establish habitat(s) and do science.

It's not easy, but it is do-able. There are plenty of people who want to go, and enough of them are probably skilled/suited enough to make it work. Robotics will be a key to making it more feasible.


Sounds a lot like SpaceX plans. I fully expect SpaceX to put people on Mars before NASA or anyone else. In my lifetime.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4462163 - 02/20/19 04:37 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,751
rwatson Offline
Hotshot
rwatson  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,751
New Concord, Ohio
Eoved this to this thread,,We have come a long way

Seems light light years ago,John Glenn orbited the Earth,I live about 100yards from his old house I was 12 years old at the time and can still remember the excitement..It's something we need to get back


https://www.onthisday.com/photos/john-glenn-orbits-the-earth


Russ
Semper Fi
#4462283 - 02/21/19 10:38 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: Dart]  
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Zamzow Offline
Member
Zamzow  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Originally Posted by Dart
I think one has to adjust expectations on what NASA does and can do now versus the heyday of the Mercury-Apollo era.

The Moon program was the right program at the right time, jump starting the technological timeline from tube to transistor technology. The economic rewards from the spin-off technology underwritten by NASA simply can't be understated.

Hell, as a kid in the early 1970's we had a black and white TV that had tubes in the back of it. Yes, it was a bit of a relic, but while rare at that time not exactly shocking to discover. There were still TV repairmen that would make house calls for them.

The Moon program was about making a technological leap, with the fundamental tools for that leap just within grasping range. We had radar; making microwaves a medium for communication rather than location finder was a concept that was understood, but unfunded (for an example). The Moon program did this, and now we have cell phones.

Huge jumps like this are very, very rare in human history. This is a Bessemer refining the way to mass produce steel of high and consistent quality event, one we take for granted.

Still, it's not like NASA has been resting on their laurels. We think nothing of having our portable devices tracking their position down to a few yards thanks to GPS, but 25 years ago this was still a dream. I remember very well standing in the desert in 1990 while the new fangled box sought a third satellite to obtain a location - and this was only available to the military. We didn't even refer to it as GPS...we talked in terms of the name of the receiver.

Both the Europeans and the Russians are struggling today to replicate the US GPS system.

Yes, tons of money are going to be spent on ground systems for the next generation of rockets. One either does this or later laughs at NASA for having 1970's or '80's tech in the control centers. Hell, the Space Shuttle's computers were criminally out of date at the end of the program's life and was subject to much conversation.

If a return to the Moon were the only goal, we could do that in pretty short order. It's not like we've forgotten how to make the Saturn V rocket, after all. Heck, we do maintenance on a big bunches of a variation of the same thing in our ICBM program.

NASA's mandate is a bit broader, and because of it a bit muddier. SpaceX is a single purpose program; the same can't be said of NASA.


BEST POST IN THIS THREAD.

#4462285 - 02/21/19 11:04 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
Zamzow Offline
Member
Zamzow  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,402
The human race is actually being pretty stupid about this.

I can get the concept of "Not Contaminating Mars" in order to maybe discover if life existed there before us, or now, I can...

But if we're really going to look millions of years into the future when Earth WILL burn and consider Mars as a place to (temporarily in relative terms) continue our survival as a species we should simply "bombard" it with bacteria, algae, fungi, whatever, and hope it takes hold, and starts up an ecosystem that we can later (MAYBE) survive off of...

The potential answering of the question of "origins of life" takes a far back seat relative to ensuring future survival - what good is such knowledge if we are doomed to extinction anyway?

#4462286 - 02/21/19 11:04 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,751
rwatson Offline
Hotshot
rwatson  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,751
New Concord, Ohio
+1 Excellent post


Russ
Semper Fi
#4462288 - 02/21/19 11:24 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: Dart]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
SC
Originally Posted by Dart

Yes, tons of money are going to be spent on ground systems for the next generation of rockets.


Yes, way too much. I am rushing to go to work right now, but if you do a bit of Google-foo you'll see what NASA spent on updating one of the Apollo era launch pads. if memory serves is was about $500 million. That's nuts.



Originally Posted by Dart

If a return to the Moon were the only goal, we could do that in pretty short order. It's not like we've forgotten how to make the Saturn V rocket, after all.


We've forgotten how to do anything quickly, efficiently. Is returning to the Moon the goal? I really don't know, and I been following this for decades. The "goal" keeps changing. Mars. Asteroid. Moon. Mars again. "Gateway".

Pssstt.... the real goal is to keep the money flowing into the same congressional districts that shuttle did.



Originally Posted by Dart

NASA's mandate is a bit broader, and because of it a bit muddier. SpaceX is a single purpose program; the same can't be said of NASA.


NASA overall does a LOT of things. Aerodynamics, unmanned probes, ISS etc. But when it comes to manned space exploration beyond earths orbit SpaceX has a better defined, and loftier, goals than NASA. NASA can't decide (in part because of chaning White House goals, but not just) where it's going or what 's doing with it's manned program.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4465119 - 03/12/19 12:44 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
SC
Think link below is to a blog post concerning the future of SLS, maybe things are starting to turn around. The comments on the post are "enlightening".


http://www.transterrestrial.com/?p=72795#comments


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4465370 - 03/13/19 04:51 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
SC


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4465502 - 03/14/19 11:23 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
SC



NASA'S SUPER-SIZED SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM MIGHT BE DOOMED


Quote
Switching to a commercial rocket for EM-1 would deliver a major blow to the SLS program, which has been criticized for is massive budget—an estimated $14 billion—and snail-speed development. But with the debut of the Falcon Heavy, its reason for being has become less and less clear. (A Falcon Heavy can deliver nearly 141,000 pounds to low-Earth orbit, while a Delta IV can carry 62,540 pounds and SLS a theoretical 209,000 pounds).



Quote
The administration also expressed that NASA’s upcoming mission to Jupiter’s moon Europa, which is slated for 2023, should launch on a commercial rocket—a reversal of a 2015 Congressional mandate that said it must fly on SLS. The budget proposal states that using a commercial rocket would save NASA over $700 million, allowing the agency to fund multiple new activities. (The Obama administration made the same proposal but was denied by Congress.)

With these proposals stripping away much of SLS’s capabilities, the heavy lifter is left with only one mission: launching Orion directly to lunar orbit. But if NASA can launch the necessary Gateway components, including Orion, on commercial rockets, the case for SLS is getting increasingly threadbare.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4465950 - 03/17/19 11:14 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 7,747
Ssnake Offline
Virtual Shiva Beast
Ssnake  Offline
Virtual Shiva Beast
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 7,747
Germoney
NASA auditioned the Congress Hearings, this secret document reveals:

[Linked Image]

#4469757 - 04/10/19 11:18 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
SC
NASA's $17-billion moon rocket ...eholders are asking if there are

"But the orange-and-white rocket has fallen three years behind schedule — and is way over budget. Almost $17 billion has been spent so far on the space vehicle, which was projected to cost $10.6 billion when its construction was approved in 2011. Experts say each SLS flight will cost at least $1 billion, or about 11 times more than SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket, which made its debut last year."


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4469769 - 04/10/19 01:18 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,804
ST0RM Offline
Senior Member
ST0RM  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,804
Ten Mile, Tn
NASA has ceased being a goal orientated and valuable asset in our US space goals. Because they are government funded, they've lost focus and have been surpassed by private companies in results. Time to dial them back to an advisory group, with these successful private companies doing the grunt work. Fixed-priced contracts instead of open ended budgets.

#4469773 - 04/10/19 01:35 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,383
PanzerMeyer Online centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Online Centaurian
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,383
Miami, FL USA
+1 Storm

The Cold War against the Soviets provided the perfect motivation for NASA for a few decades but once that was over, the cracks and flaws in the agency became quickly apparent.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4469796 - 04/10/19 03:26 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
SC
Agreed, NASA needs to return to its NACA roots.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4492994 - 10/15/19 11:47 AM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
F4UDash4 Online cool
Veteran
F4UDash4  Online Cool
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,735
SC
After a “corrective action,” Boeing back at work on SLS rocket core stage

Quote
It is not clear what triggered the need for a corrective action, but one source suggested to Ars that Boeing technicians are having difficulty attaching the large rocket engines in a horizontal configuration rather than a vertical position. NASA and Boeing made a late change to the final assembly process, deciding to mate pieces of the core stage horizontally rather than vertically to save time. However, this source said horizontal mating of the engines has created problems.


Read the comments, they are brutal. And rightly so.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4493023 - 10/15/19 03:59 PM Re: NASA'S Boondoggle [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,569
Mr_Blastman Online content
Hotshot
Mr_Blastman  Online Content
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,569
Atlanta, GA
They better get out the shoehorn and contract to Santa's elves, sounds like a tough job!

But are those elves certified? They might need to file an inspection report in triplicate after requesting a t-99 review and credentialed background check, uniform safety code assessment and hammer and nail augmentation approval.

Last edited by Mr_Blastman; 10/15/19 04:15 PM.
Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0