|
Science Forum Index » Space - Shuttle Forum » In two years time...
Page 2 of 10 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| Brian Thorn |
 Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 13:32:02 -0800 (PST), Kalle07 <kalle07@live.com>
wrote:
Quote: Did I get this right, there are TWO successors being developed for
replacing the shuttle? The Constellation program by NASA, and Falcon 9/
Dragon by SpaceX?
No, there is Constellation for human operations and COTS (Commercial
Orbital Transportation Services, or something like that) for cargo.
SpaceX's Falcon/Dragon is one entry in COTS. Orbital Sciences' with
Taurus II/Cygnus is the other (replacing Rocketplane/Kistler, which
failed to achieve independent funding.) SpaceX might eventually make a
man-rated Falcon/Dragon, but that's cart-before-the-horse at this
point (Falcon 1 has not yet flown successfully, nevermind Falcon 9.)
Quote: And another question: Why does NASA not buy/license the Energiya
rocket from the Russians? Sounds like a successful design with no
chance to get built again due to money shortage...
a. Energiya is dead and gone, having only flown twice (the last was 19
years ago), and one of them was only partially successful. Parts of it
live on (as Zenit) but that's a long way from having Energiya just
waiting for someone to buy and launch.
b. The U.S. Congress isn't exactly Russia's No.1 Fan these days.
c. The U.S. Congress wants to maximize use of the existing Shuttle
infrastructure and workforce.
d. Russia isn't offering to sell.
Brian |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| John Doe |
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Brian Thorn wrote:
Quote: c. The U.S. Congress wants to maximize use of the existing Shuttle
infrastructure and workforce.
Is there a way to objectively state whether these politican decisions
will result in a costlier vehicle to design/build/operate compared to
one where engineers would have been totally free to choose the
technologies/designs ? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Brian Thorn" <bthorn64@suddenlink.net> wrote in message
news:7ejms3l4sea1uco050pei4iq9meeo4qk8n@4ax.com...
Quote: On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 17:48:55 -0500, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote:
And another question: Why does NASA not buy/license the Energiya
rocket from the Russians? Sounds like a successful design with no
chance to get built again due to money shortage...
Because it fails the number one objective of the new program: reducing
US
dependence on Russia.
And fails quite a few other criteria, such as "2 flights a successful
program does not make".
Polyus performed an Ocean Insertion Maneuver, so even Flight 1 has to
have an asterisk next to "Successful".
I was being generous. Besides, there's evidence that the OIM (love that
term btw) was somewhat intentional and really a function of the upper stage.
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Derek Lyons |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:00 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Kalle07 <kalle07@live.com> wrote:
Quote: And another question: Why does NASA not buy/license the Energiya
rocket from the Russians?
Because there isn't an Energiya rocket to buy/license. It's an
thoroughly ex-parrot.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Derek Lyons |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote:
Quote: I don't know why people keep on trotting out Energiya as a symbol of
success.
It's not that Energiya is regarded as such a sucess - it's that
Energiya is regarded as the largest available [for certain handwaving
value of 'available'] penile substitute.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Danny Deger |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:49 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Alan Erskine" <alanerskine@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:ZrUwj.19500$421.8117@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Quote: What will this group be called; sci.space.orion?
No but we need one -- or one called sci.space.constellation. Anyone know
how to set up a new newsgroup?
Danny Deger |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Scott M. Kozel |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Alan Erskine" <alanersk...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
Quote:
What will this group be called; sci.space.orion?
It will still be here to discuss the shuttle, because its retirement
won't stop people from wanting to discuss it.
There will be a new newsgroup created for the new manned space
transportation system. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Kalle07" <kalle07@live.com> wrote in message
news:4c9c4a9f-f3db-424a-9b70-f4bfbe3a54f8@m34g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Quote: On Mar 2, 11:48 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
mooregr_deletet...@greenms.com> wrote:
I don't know why people keep on trotting out Energiya as a symbol of
success.
It was a honest question, not a suggestion to NASA.
Then in that case the answer is that there's no way to call Energiya a
success.
Even Russia couldn't afford to keep flying it.
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:52 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Derek Lyons" <fairwater@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:47cfa227.572683921@news.supernews.com...
Quote: "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote:
I don't know why people keep on trotting out Energiya as a symbol of
success.
It's not that Energiya is regarded as such a sucess - it's that
Energiya is regarded as the largest available [for certain handwaving
value of 'available'] penile substitute.
Oh, no I've heard more than one person tout its "success" and even its
reusability, despite never having actually demonstrated it.
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Alan Erskine |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote in message
news:13sp3m1lfr2fh55@corp.supernews.com...
Quote: Oh, no I've heard more than one person tout its "success" and even its
reusability, despite never having actually demonstrated it.
But it wasn't given a fair chance. Let's give it another chance and find
out. (Sorry, Greg; I couldn't resist). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Alan Erskine" <alan.erskine@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:Ww0zj.21928$421.8878@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Quote:
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote in
message
news:13sp3m1lfr2fh55@corp.supernews.com...
Oh, no I've heard more than one person tout its "success" and even its
reusability, despite never having actually demonstrated it.
But it wasn't given a fair chance. Let's give it another chance and find
out. (Sorry, Greg; I couldn't resist).
Oh, good point. You're right. I'm a convert. :-)
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Alan Erskine |
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:25 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote in message
news:13sp6ljrp8snsd2@corp.supernews.com...
Quote:
"Alan Erskine" <alan.erskine@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:Ww0zj.21928$421.8878@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" <mooregr_deleteth1s@greenms.com> wrote in
message
news:13sp3m1lfr2fh55@corp.supernews.com...
Oh, no I've heard more than one person tout its "success" and even its
reusability, despite never having actually demonstrated it.
But it wasn't given a fair chance. Let's give it another chance and
find
out. (Sorry, Greg; I couldn't resist).
Oh, good point. You're right. I'm a convert. 
See! It worked!
I agree that Energia wasn't a success, but it had potential. The reason the
Soviets couldn't afford it was simple - they couldn't afford anything (not
only rockets, but toilet paper, food etc)! The communists were living on
borrowed time and their time ran out; along with the money.
The real reason why Energia won't be making a come back is also simple - it
no longer exists. The stages for Energia 3 were damaged when the building
roof collapsed. I think all the equipment was destroyed afterwards. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Alan Erskine |
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 1:28 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Scott M. Kozel" <kozelsm@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bafc4480-b639-4ed6-a977-83e7c306e7c0@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Quote: "Alan Erskine" <alanersk...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
What will this group be called; sci.space.orion?
It will still be here to discuss the shuttle, because its retirement
won't stop people from wanting to discuss it.
There will be a new newsgroup created for the new manned space
transportation system.
I think that's a better idea. I like that. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 4:34 am |
|
|
|
|
On Mar 4, 8:36 am, bob haller safety advocate <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
Quote: It will still be here to discuss the shuttle, because its retirement
won't stop people from wanting to discuss it.
i doubt it will be retired on schedule............
Define schedule. There are no more ET's being built so it will be
retired in 3 years
Always have to look at the bad side of things?
safety advocate? I think not, just a smoke screen. Just change it to
plain anti shuttle/NASA. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Derek Lyons |
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 3:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Scott M. Kozel" <kozelsm@comcast.net> wrote:
Quote: "Alan Erskine" <alanersk...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
What will this group be called; sci.space.orion?
It will still be here to discuss the shuttle, because its retirement
won't stop people from wanting to discuss it.
When the Shuttle retires, it discussion properly belongs in .history,
and .shuttle should be decommissioned. That being said,
decommissioning a newsgroup is basically impossible.
Quote: There will be a new newsgroup created for the new manned space
transportation system.
I suggested long ago a sci.space.* hierarchy based on functions, the
proposal went nowhere.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
