Posted on 09/09/2005 5:26:35 AM PDT by nuke rocketeer
In the past month, we have been blessed with numerous leaks from NASA of various study documents relating to the new boosters that will be needed to carry out the new manned moon program. I've been monitoring the large volume of Web chatter about these plans, and have noticed a disturbing theme therein. Many Space Cadets are expressing dissatisfaction with these leaked NASA plans. They say that the Shuttle-derived boosters are too primitive, too expensive to develop, too expensive to operate, and not inspiring enough. They can't understand why we will be returning to the Moon with rockets and space capsules that look like minor variations of those used in the Apollo program 40 years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at spacedaily.com ...
Urban legend...I heard it was not true.
Hey, I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt in understanding why you insist on repeatedly attacking arguments I haven't made, and arguing against points I haven't raised. Generously, I allow for the possibility that you're simply incapable of reading my posts as written. Alternative explanations would include the possibility that you're incapable of distinguishing between imaginary posts and real ones, or that you're simply fundamentally dishonest. If you want to take up either of those, be my guest. Cheers!
Did you post something or am I imagining it??
or that you're simply fundamentally dishonest
Now you're wearing thin on my humor. I don't mind being told I'm wrong, I can even deal with being called a fool, especially when it comes from people I don't particularly have any respect for. But when I wish someone a relaxing Sunday, and they decide to call me dishonest, they've invited response. In person I'd ask them to accompany me outside to handle it properly. In this forum I'll expect you to consider this conversation terminated. Enough has been said that I'm quite comfortable that everyone else can glean your nature and mine, irrespective of our positions on the particulars of airflow dynamics.
If you put on a big red rubber nose and floppy shoes, and someone subsequently labels you a clown, you are perfectly within your rights to take offense - it does not, however, change the nature of the situation. Good day, sir.
I see that your declaration that this conversation is terminated is as reliable as anything else you've posted here. Nevertheless, I'm done - you may have the last word.
Dig, dig, dig...
There was an article years ago about applying real science to Traveller in, I think, The Space Gamer. One of the more interesting bits was a discussion about engine or reactor efficiency vs. the energy output of the engines and what happens to the waste heat. The speculation was that you'd turn your 100 ton Seeker into a pile of molten metal seconds after turning on your Power Plant. Of course that was Classic Traveller, with computers the size of old mainframes. :-)
That's so 20th Century!
These days naquada is the ticket.
Get with the program.
It's never gotten better with any of the later incarnations, either. There were lots of online discussions of how a vessel might be able to shed gigawatts, or even terawatts of energy. Eventually, the conclusion was, "it just happens, and your starship doesn't glow like a small sun across the electromagnetic spectrum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.