You are not logged in.
What about having the tether rotating perpendicular to the path? That way the engines could have a direct alignment and considering the crewed portion has the fuel versus an empty spent stage it'd be closer to the barycenter/axis of the setup.
My guess is NASA bureacrats will insist on using something more like an exercise treadmill or a rotating bed setup if this tether argument proves too costly or if it turns out those deep space issues can be mitigated with something simpiler.
I wonder who Congress is listening to when they write up these reports.
Agreed. It's hard to convince them and easy to sway away.
However, these arguments also confirm what NASA was saying all along - they need more funds to pull it off. Congress never gave NASA everything it needed to properly start Constellation off.
Update from NASA's site:
Lander Configuration 711-A shows over 4 MT of cargo with 4 crew to the Outpost. Nice inflatable dome
Can you get a pic of that to see?
Bear in mind gaeto the only meritable cargo will come from the cargo lander, not the crewed vehicle. The best I imagine a crew vehicle could leave behind would be a modest inflatable dome. Most likely the crew vehicles would bring smaller equiptment, likely replacement parts or even change-outs akin to how the Hubble periodically was changed.
A Titan-Enceleadus explorer would no doubt gain some merit for funding after this finding!
A good idea to expend the shroud to maximize capabiliy, and they explained how that gives worthwhile implications here:
...the primary impact being on structures, we can widen and squat the descent module. Doesn’t change subsystems but gets the deck closer to the surface.
Not quite as dramatic as I expected, but simpiler the more easy to deploy. As long as it works can't complain I suppose.
Gaetanomarono circa >1000BC: Hey, early man, putting the animal in the front of the cart (instead of the side) was my idea!!!
Gaetanomarono circa 1900AD: Hey Wright Brothers, putting a propeller on a flying wing was my idea!!!
Gaetanomarono circa 1930's: Hey Robart Goddard, putting the second stage on TOP of the first was MY IDEA!!!11!1
Gaetano, one of the reasons that nobody respects you is that you take credit for simple or obvious ideas, and loudly insist that you be given praise for it or defend them with intellectually dishonest prattle. Thus, spam.
Amen to all of the above.
I still have yet to see gaetano write an article that doesn't include either a link to his site or a JPEG.
AGAIN... OF COURSE... they say that have "invented" it in 2006...
"invented it before", "devloped internally", "already thought", etc. ...it's going to be a classic with my ideas...
Classic gaeto claiming he invented everything from the wheel onward.
however, but there is NOT any PUBLIC evidence of that... NO 2006 news, NO 2006 articles or .pdf on the NASA site, NOTHING
what's really curious and funny, is that LOTS of "experts" have written critics and insults against me in the past months saying "how much" my ideas was unfeasible, not a good engineering choice, bad, heavy, etc. etc. etc.
while NOW that a similar idea (but not good like MY idea) is proposed by NASA, everybody take it seriously, or are silent...
*blows foghorn of criticism into gaeto's ear*
The silence is broken. The fact there's no public evidence suggests it was not NASA funded and I don't recall any rocket using an escape system like that. You whine about windtunnel testing and vibrations with the current design...
WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK AN AWKWARD SET OF ROCKETS JUTTING OUT WILL DO TO THE AERODYNAMICS?! MAKE IT DANCE LIKE A BALLERINA?!
It has been voted. You...are the weakest link. Goodbye.
It will not. No proposed version of the Ares-I upper stage will be radically heavier than the current one, and even with a modest decrease in thrust of the four-segment booster, you will still have vibration problems to contend with. The Shuttle external tank, fueled, weighs almost eight hundred tonnes, and add the Shuttle orbiter with a full payload to that, and the boosters push almost a thousand tonnes. Ares-I's upper stage doesn't weigh anywhere near that.
assuming you're right on this claim... that means the Ares-1 must be entirely SCRAPPED from the plan (no matter its design) ...but, to do what? ..."Direct"... ?
![]()
![]()
...ok, DIRECT !!! (but just call it "FAST-SLV"...
)
If anything ought to be scrapped it's your website.
GCN is trying to break it down to you. A four segment SRB is already designed to lift a massive vehicle into orbit as will its five part successor - if anything the fact it was made to work in pairs means the transition will be easier when adapting it to Ares-V. The Orion is going to be a vehicle specialized for crew transport first and foremost versus the shuttle which was a huge vehicle built on compromises...in short a smaller vehicle with less trouble to worry about. Coupled with the second stage I have no doubt it will launch.
So kiss it gaeto
add a second J-2X is not a new idea (others have already suggested that to add power to the 2nd stage) only the position change in my concept
They had considered two engines for the EDS on Ares-V and since have reduced it to one now, and the Ares-V is going to be an even more powerful vehicle - that itself tells me two engines on an Ares-I would be a waste as well.
No comment except I'd choose:
e) Something not from Ghost NASA
...and that is why there is no e) in Gaeto's JPEG
Take a look at the images.
A strong magnifying glass is needed to view the detail.
Zydar
And I looked and agree with Cyclops opinion - you could interpret anything out of the bumps and dots hence why I am waiting for lander itself to land rather than listen to contraversey theories. Believe all you want but I want lander imagery not ranting.
Unless the Martians are insect-size those are boulders, not buildings. The images are all by HiRise and it images things on the same scale as our space probes; something a meter or larger will appear.
Personally I'm not into debating about unfocused blips...which in the case of the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, and the Face of Mars all turned out to be rocks and hoaxes or trees or shubbery. What I am interested in about Phoenix's mission is it's nearly state-of-the-art ability to detect organics in frozen water-rich Martian soil. If there is any life anywhere on at least the Martian surface it'd likely be the poles, and that would include intelligent life...
So if this is a city then Zydar Phoenix is landing upon then the images from its descent camera and close-ups of the natives will prove that final lynch pin you conspiracy lunatics need, and those Martians won't be juuuuuuuuuuust out of focus enough to keep real scientists from drawing conclusions that'd kill estranged enthusiasm.
I'd bet 600 of your British pounds that it won't be a city Zydar, but more likely cracked terrain ressembling the dry valleys of Antartica. I also bet you won't take that bet and ignore any of the actual pictures Phoenix sends back via "telly" as you British enjoy calling the America "TV" while wildly trying to rally fake support to make NASA reveal the 'real' pictures.
The post is very relevant to the integrity of the Phoenix mission and has nothing at all to do with 'Intelligent Alien Life'?
Zydar
*buzzer sounds* I am sorry you did not phrase the grammar of your own question correctly. Pat Sayjack what is the consolation price? Oh yes a copy of speaking and writing English fluently which I find sad that an Englishman screwed up.
As far as what we see in the images of Phoenix's landing site...how about we wait for images directly from the lander itself?!?
It is sounding like they're going for plan A: Atmospheric Science out of those previous three. Slightly dissapointed they're not going for G: Geology but I did note an trade-off that would be worthwhile: they are placing emphacis on including a trade-gas instrument that'd help pin-out methane and/or volcanic emissions. That would definetely help verify if Olympus and Tharis, the supposed two youngest regions of volcanism, are active to any degree today.
If a Spacecraft took off from the moon burning H2/O2, would the steam turn back into a layer of ice on the launch bad where it could be collected, or reach escape velocity (which I doubt)?
You doubt correctly. You're talking steam a few hundred degrees hot in an airless enviorment where the solar wind is supreme. A few atoms at best would resettle if any, and bear in mind what little ice that's on Luna took a few billion to accumulate from comet collisions, each of which only contributed a tiny bit at a time of each comet's mass.
So yeah, snowball's chance in Hell senerio.
Sounds like thinking that led to the bastard birth of the disfunctionally chimeric International Space Station. :?
You might start with a proposal to save money, but in an effort to save the minimal requirements of a mediocre project you would end up paying the same for a titanic project.
To quote Luke, "We're going in and going in full throttle." I want the Moon and won't settle for less.
It mentions wind tunnel testing in April - this April or April 2009?
I hope the best for Burtan and the commercial rocket industry....
...but considering what happened to those poor workers with that exploding rocket engine a few months ago...sadly I'm not holding my breath for him anymore.
Personally I put more hopes on SpaceX and Orbital since they're not funding "fad-suborbital trourist rides" but launching cargo into orbit.
All the same though they have to start somewhere, and a non-goverment funded commercial vehicle has many hurtles to jump.
This is a basic conceptual lander used for trades and top level requirements such as mass, size and capabilities. Many different designs have been proposed including horizontal landers (see earlier in this topic for images and references), no decisions have been made yet. This whole project is in pre phase A study and formal design work doesn't begin until about 2011 unless there is more funding.
Exactly Cyclops! And gaeto before you mutter or type a word ESA ALSO had made revisions to the Columbus module. There were versions that made it a free-flying mini-space station...but just like Hermes they scrapped elements and downgraded it into just another laboratory module for the ISS.
... the only logical reason of this (bad) choice may reside in a too little and underpowered Ares-5 that doesn't allow to carry much more than THIS Altair
Compared to ESA's Ariane V that you are bombastic over the Ares V is a MONSTER that ESA won't be matching for decades to come.
If you're so worked up over Altair gaeto-spam consider this: if they really wanna make more room they could consider a Mars Direct-esque Hab lander...provided there is an ascent vehicle planted on the surface to return to the CEV.
...however like Cyclops says it's more likely to work the other way around - a habitat would be landed first and then a crewed Altair makes the scene. Considering NASA is opting not just for sortie missions but building up an outpost as one of its top prorities don't throw out what Cyclops said about a habitat being landed there.
Interesting process, does this mean that some of the Venusian atmosphere reaches Earth?
Good question. I assume same could be said for Earth & Mars but obviously the gap is longer. I doubt it since this is just a trickle of ioninzed gas were talking about - probably after a few million miles it gets thinned out by the solar wind to point wher Earth is only 'smattered' by a few Venusian atoms out of several trillion or so.
GUYS CHECK THIS OUT!! http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/0 … anche.html
A REAL LIVE MARTIAN AVALANCHE! :shock: CAPTURED BY HIRISE!