Swimming on the moon anyone?
11-16-2009, 10:04 AM
#28
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,847
Total Cats: 27
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.
Reply
0
0
11-16-2009, 11:24 AM
#29
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
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.
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.
Reply
0
0
11-16-2009, 11:53 AM
#30
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,847
Total Cats: 27
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.
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.
Reply
0
0
11-16-2009, 12:12 PM
#31
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
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.
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.
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.
Reply
0
0
11-16-2009, 12:17 PM
#32
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Statesville, NC
Posts: 2,738
Total Cats: 319
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.
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.
Reply
0
0
11-16-2009, 12:36 PM
#33
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
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.
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.
Reply
0
0
11-16-2009, 01:16 PM
#34
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,847
Total Cats: 27
Reply
0
0
11-16-2009, 02:13 PM
#35
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
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.
Reply
0
0
11-16-2009, 02:20 PM
#36
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VA, Germany, Afghanistan
Posts: 2,945
Total Cats: 3
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.
Reply
0
0
11-17-2009, 11:19 AM
#38
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,847
Total Cats: 27
An interesting article pertaining to commercial (private) sector development of manned launch services.
NASA Industry Begin Discussions on Commercial Crew Development Dollars | SpaceNews.com
NASA Industry Begin Discussions on Commercial Crew Development Dollars | SpaceNews.com
Reply
0
0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
