2 steps back to the Moon, one step forward?
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
We had competition back then.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Moral Muscle The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Back then, there was a purpose to the endeavour, and funding was probably unlimited. The President made the announcement, it was therefore fully funded. Now, NASA is telling you what they can do with their current level of funding. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
Back then, there was a purpose to the endeavour, and funding was probably unlimited. The President made the announcement, it was therefore fully funded. Now, NASA is telling you what they can do with their current level of funding. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
The risks taken in the original moon shot are no longer acceptable...and safety is really expensive/difficult in rocketry. '--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
Back then, there was a purpose to the endeavour, and funding was probably unlimited. The President made the announcement, it was therefore fully funded. Now, NASA is telling you what they can do with their current level of funding. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
That's true - I keep forgetting that. It still makes me sad though. It always seems like there was all this potential we had and it was just pissed away for 20 years. Maybe we'll do a better job this time. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
Back then, there was a purpose to the endeavour, and funding was probably unlimited. The President made the announcement, it was therefore fully funded. Now, NASA is telling you what they can do with their current level of funding. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
Christian Graus wrote:
Now, NASA is telling you what they can do with their current level of funding.
Perhaps it's a disguised plea for money! :rolleyes: Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
The Ultimate Grid - The #1 MFC grid out there! -
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Jim Crafton wrote:
OK, yes they want this re-usable.
And see, we tried that once already, and it didn't work out so well, so maybe they think they'll do it right this time...
---- Scripts i've known... CPhog 0.9.9 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.1 - printer-friendly forums
-
The risks taken in the original moon shot are no longer acceptable...and safety is really expensive/difficult in rocketry. '--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
I find the whole risks argument ridiculous. Life takes risk. The original airplane pilots took enourmous risks. What about sailors (early on)? And so on, and so forth. Yeah people may die. I'd gladly take that risk to be a part of a manned moon mission. And the longer we wrangle, and twist our fingers at the possibility over this, the more time we lose, and the less effective we are. I'm *not* saying we should be ignorant of safety issues. But I think we can let them blind us to getting the job done. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Now, NASA is telling you what they can do with their current level of funding.
Perhaps it's a disguised plea for money! :rolleyes: Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
The Ultimate Grid - The #1 MFC grid out there!They certainly don't get much. My understanding is that they take around 1% (or less) of the US federal budget. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
Jim Crafton wrote:
OK, yes they want this re-usable.
And see, we tried that once already, and it didn't work out so well, so maybe they think they'll do it right this time...
---- Scripts i've known... CPhog 0.9.9 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.1 - printer-friendly forums
One can only hope. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
They certainly don't get much. My understanding is that they take around 1% (or less) of the US federal budget. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Didn't the Bush administration just announce a huge round of funding for Nasa along with the plan for a Mars mission? I recall all the peanut gallery over at Slashdot saying the government is spending too much money and shouldn't be wasting it on Nasa.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Moral Muscle The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
If they failed in 60's it wouldn't really be a big deal, no one really expected them to pull it off anyway. Today, however, every time NASA fails, they face great criticism and embarrassment. Not to mention the risk of getting their funding cut. So, stakes are higher today for them IMO.
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
A big problem is justification. The only genuine one is to create a massive telescope array on the far side (which I'd far rather see than a manned trip to Mars.) This is the same problem with the International Space Station. Looks neat, sounds cool, but is essentially useless. Skylab and especially Mir gave us better fundamental research at a fraction of the cost. As has been said, though, as a nation we are absurdly risk averse. Even far too many people that knowingly engage in risky activity, turn around and sue someone when they get hurt. (This is why I don't think the private space ventures will succeed; one or two ships blow up and the lawsuits will kill them.) Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
They could have done so much more but are simply making another Apollo. Oh, and the shuttlereplacement has been put back to accomodate this I think. The tigress is here :-D
-
A big problem is justification. The only genuine one is to create a massive telescope array on the far side (which I'd far rather see than a manned trip to Mars.) This is the same problem with the International Space Station. Looks neat, sounds cool, but is essentially useless. Skylab and especially Mir gave us better fundamental research at a fraction of the cost. As has been said, though, as a nation we are absurdly risk averse. Even far too many people that knowingly engage in risky activity, turn around and sue someone when they get hurt. (This is why I don't think the private space ventures will succeed; one or two ships blow up and the lawsuits will kill them.) Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Joe Woodbury wrote:
As has been said, though, as a nation we are absurdly risk averse.
We didn't use to be such a bunch of pussies. What the hell happened? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
I find the whole risks argument ridiculous. Life takes risk. The original airplane pilots took enourmous risks. What about sailors (early on)? And so on, and so forth. Yeah people may die. I'd gladly take that risk to be a part of a manned moon mission. And the longer we wrangle, and twist our fingers at the possibility over this, the more time we lose, and the less effective we are. I'm *not* saying we should be ignorant of safety issues. But I think we can let them blind us to getting the job done. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Here's a big question. What's to be gained in going back to the moon ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
I find the whole risks argument ridiculous. Life takes risk. The original airplane pilots took enourmous risks. What about sailors (early on)? And so on, and so forth. Yeah people may die. I'd gladly take that risk to be a part of a manned moon mission. And the longer we wrangle, and twist our fingers at the possibility over this, the more time we lose, and the less effective we are. I'm *not* saying we should be ignorant of safety issues. But I think we can let them blind us to getting the job done. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
I agree - but the focus groups that decide everything about our existence seem to think otherwise. '--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
Joe Woodbury wrote:
As has been said, though, as a nation we are absurdly risk averse.
We didn't use to be such a bunch of pussies. What the hell happened? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Jim Crafton wrote:
What the hell happened?
we're fat and lazy Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Here's a big question. What's to be gained in going back to the moon ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
I can think of 2 reasons off the top of my head 1) Because it's there. I suspect the act of expansion, or pushing ourselves to new frotniers is part of the human psyche. Obviously hard to figure out the precise ROI on that. 2) This is going to sound stupid, but here goes: what if something were to happen here on Earth that neccessitated leaving the planet? War, plague (man made or not), asteroid(? :wtf: ), who knows, but what if we needed the expertise to get off planet? Wouldn't it be awful sad if we were helpless to do anything about saving some part of the human race because we were too damn lazy to develop that part of our technology? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
I can think of 2 reasons off the top of my head 1) Because it's there. I suspect the act of expansion, or pushing ourselves to new frotniers is part of the human psyche. Obviously hard to figure out the precise ROI on that. 2) This is going to sound stupid, but here goes: what if something were to happen here on Earth that neccessitated leaving the planet? War, plague (man made or not), asteroid(? :wtf: ), who knows, but what if we needed the expertise to get off planet? Wouldn't it be awful sad if we were helpless to do anything about saving some part of the human race because we were too damn lazy to develop that part of our technology? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
1 - I see that as a real reason, but not one that is likely to generate funding if there are no Ruskies to beat you to it :-) 2 - How long do we expect to save any part of the human race ? How do we make life sustainable on the moon ? How do we decide who gets to go ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++