Swimming on the moon anyone? - Page 2 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Insert BS here A place to discuss anything you want

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-14-2009, 06:20 PM   #21
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VA, Germany, Afghanistan
Posts: 2,967
Total Cats: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apariah View Post
This I completely agree with your post! Not only could private companies do it cheaper and probably better, I'm sure this would also create some nice paying jobs as well.
Yea cuz NASA only pays minimum wage

EDIT: completely agree with the fact that the private sector should get into space travel....just sayin though.
KPLAFIN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2009, 06:24 PM   #22
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KPLAFIN View Post
Yea cuz NASA only pays minimum wage

EDIT: completely agree with the fact that the private sector should get into space travel....just sayin though.
More jobs than NASA could provide I bet.
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2009, 09:31 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NHR, TX
Posts: 536
Total Cats: -2
Default

I would have thought that was common sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NA6C-Guy View Post
More jobs than NASA could provide I bet.
apariah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2009, 09:37 PM   #24
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VA, Germany, Afghanistan
Posts: 2,967
Total Cats: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apariah View Post
I would have thought that was common sense.
Touche
KPLAFIN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2009, 10:16 PM   #25
Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
 
nicacus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SLC UT
Posts: 1,133
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccote View Post
Everyone knows that the landing was a fake. And the moon mirrors and rocks? Put there by scientists to fool us just like the fossils.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPLAFIN View Post
Get it right guy.

Wrong and wrong
Everyone knows it was Lord Xenu

idiots
nicacus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 09:35 AM   #26
Ben
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (33)
 
Ben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: atlanta-ish
Posts: 12,689
Total Cats: 99
Default

I expected no less from you guys.
Ben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 04:21 PM   #27
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
I expected no less from you guys.
What from who?
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 11:04 AM   #28
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,889
Total Cats: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NA6C-Guy View Post
I mean, look at Paul Allen and SpaceShipOne. He went to "space" with a total development cost of only $25 million.
SpaceShipOne and Virgin Galactic is NOT the same thing as NASA. Going straight up and down is NOT the same thing as going into LEO. Not even close.

There are already examples of commercial space ventures that are not run by NASA. The commercial telecommunications satellite industry is one.

BTW some data from the LCROSS impact. More confirmation of water on the moon. I agree, this is a big deal.
LCROSS Finds Water On Moon

Man went to the moon, period. To say otherwise is to unjustly belittle the monumental achievements of some great Scientists and Engineers.
ZX-Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 12:24 PM   #29
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZX-Tex View Post
SpaceShipOne and Virgin Galactic is NOT the same thing as NASA. Going straight up and down is NOT the same thing as going into LEO. Not even close.

There are already examples of commercial space ventures that are not run by NASA. The commercial telecommunications satellite industry is one.

BTW some data from the LCROSS impact. More confirmation of water on the moon. I agree, this is a big deal.
LCROSS Finds Water On Moon

Man went to the moon, period. To say otherwise is to unjustly belittle the monumental achievements of some great Scientists and Engineers.
Which is why I compared it to the X-15 project and not a NASA space mission, just to show the cost differences between a government run operation and a private company.
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 12:53 PM   #30
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,889
Total Cats: 28
Default

Well I do not think X-15 and SpaceShipOne is a good analogy either. They are two completely different missions. Plus the X-15 was ground breaking. No one had gone nearly that fast or that high before. Paul Allen had a lot of existing knowledge to leverage, not to mention a huge improvement in things like computer modeling and advanced materials that became available since the X-15 mission. Plus SpaceShipOne does not reach the same speeds.

It is like saying that the old room-sized vacuum tube computer builders, or the Cray designers, were inefficient and overpriced because those computers were much more expensive to develop than a modern desktop computer. That is not strictly a great analogy though, since the cost of production development is spread over many units. But you get my point.

Anyway I am not saying the Government is as efficient as private industry. But, that is not the sole reason for the difference in development cost. The bigger driver by far is the differences in what is achieved.
ZX-Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 01:12 PM   #31
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZX-Tex View Post
Well I do not think X-15 and SpaceShipOne is a good analogy either. They are two completely different missions. Plus the X-15 was ground breaking. No one had gone nearly that fast or that high before. Paul Allen had a lot of existing knowledge to leverage, not to mention a huge improvement in things like computer modeling and advanced materials that became available since the X-15 mission. Plus SpaceShipOne does not reach the same speeds.

It is like saying that the old room-sized vacuum tube computer builders, or the Cray designers, were inefficient and overpriced because those computers were much more expensive to develop than a modern desktop computer. That is not strictly a great analogy though, since the cost of production development is spread over many units. But you get my point.

Anyway I am not saying the Government is as efficient as private industry. But, that is not the sole reason for the difference in development cost. The bigger driver by far is the differences in what is achieved.
Yeah yeah Mr. Smart Guy. You guess you get my point, even if my analogy was bad.

Private > Government

That's all I was trying to say. But still, what Allen did with $25 million is pretty impressive. Just think if we had many teams like that on board with our space program. Get some fresh minds in there that aren't tied down by the government.
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 01:17 PM   #32
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 2,121
Total Cats: 44
Default

I'm wondering what the Air Force's UAV program will get into in the next 20 years. Space travel, flying on the moon's surface, who knows. They probly already have lol.

I'm in line for AF's UAV program, getting kind of impatient though lol. Going in as an enlistee and everyone has it on their list now.
flier129 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 01:36 PM   #33
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Not gonna be doing much space travel with propellers

I have a friend that was a UAV pilot last I heard. haven't seen him in over a year though. Probably a pretty fun place to be.
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 02:16 PM   #34
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,889
Total Cats: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NA6C-Guy View Post
Just think if we had many teams like that on board with our space program. Get some fresh minds in there that aren't tied down by the government.
Well we already do. Though NASA's name goes on the Missions, a lot of the high-end cutting-edge development work for these Missions is done by Scientists and Engineers working as contractors outside of NASA. Take SpaceX for example; they are developing lower-cost launch vehicles. Even though NASA is one of their potential clients, they are an outside company, funded by private money, developing a new product for space use.
ZX-Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 03:13 PM   #35
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
NA6C-Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 8,038
Total Cats: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZX-Tex View Post
Well we already do. Though NASA's name goes on the Missions, a lot of the high-end cutting-edge development work for these Missions is done by Scientists and Engineers working as contractors outside of NASA. Take SpaceX for example; they are developing lower-cost launch vehicles. Even though NASA is one of their potential clients, they are an outside company, funded by private money, developing a new product for space use.
Damn you! I know we already do, I meant MORE than we currently do. More funding from them anyway. That way **** won't be delayed because of government careless spending and funding cuts.
NA6C-Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 03:20 PM   #36
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VA, Germany, Afghanistan
Posts: 2,967
Total Cats: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flier129 View Post
I'm in line for AF's UAV program, getting kind of impatient though lol. Going in as an enlistee and everyone has it on their list now.
You know the Army has UAV's as well.... Also as far as I know the UAV school's are the same for the AF and Army (both in AZ) and only hold sessions 2-3 times a year, Army is still easier/quicker to get in on if you want to check into it.
KPLAFIN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2009, 04:33 PM   #37
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,889
Total Cats: 28
Default

Yeah in fact several years ago I helped develop one of the UAVs for the Army. No ****.
ZX-Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2009, 12:19 PM   #38
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,889
Total Cats: 28
Default

An interesting article pertaining to commercial (private) sector development of manned launch services.
NASA Industry Begin Discussions on Commercial Crew Development Dollars | SpaceNews.com
ZX-Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2009, 11:50 AM   #39
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,889
Total Cats: 28
Default

An example of small guy private sector space engineering
NASA 'glove challenge' set for Thursday
ZX-Tex is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nuke Mars! Joe Perez Current Events, News, Politics 8 09-30-2015 05:41 PM
Monk Does the West Coast Monk Insert BS here 42 08-10-2015 06:57 PM
To the Moon! (no, really!) Joe Perez Current Events, News, Politics 13 02-03-2015 06:21 PM
A Realistic Plan for World Peace Joe Perez Insert BS here 5 03-22-2011 03:28 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:37 PM.