Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I Like To Watch
Fox News ^ | October 10, 2002 | Rand Simberg

Posted on 10/10/2002 11:43:50 AM PDT by NonZeroSum

Edited on 04/22/2004 12:34:52 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

After more than 20 years of operations, NASA provided a new view of a shuttle launch on Monday, as they returned to flight after a four-month hiatus.

For the first time, television and internet viewers of the launch were able to see first the launch pad, then Cape Canaveral, then Florida, and finally the earth itself get rapidly smaller as the shuttle ascended on its tail of fire.


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: camera; people; shuttle; space; vicarious; voyeur
Space for the people.
1 posted on 10/10/2002 11:43:50 AM PDT by NonZeroSum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

DONATE TODAY!!!.
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD


2 posted on 10/10/2002 11:45:04 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brett66
Space Ping...
3 posted on 10/10/2002 12:06:24 PM PDT by NonZeroSum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum
the viewers may have seen nothing but an instantaneous fogging of the lens from it, because the view afterwards was obscured by some sort of deposit.

Not a "deposit." The lens was sandblasted by the exhaust of the separation rockets -- which includes aluminum oxide, just like you get on sandpaper.

4 posted on 10/10/2002 12:09:15 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
The cost of the camera was nearly $1million........what a waste of money for the result obtained.
5 posted on 10/10/2002 12:22:21 PM PDT by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
The cost of the camera was nearly $1million........what a waste of money for the result obtained.

Most of that was non-recurring development costs. All subsequent cameras will cost a couple of thousand bucks.

Even so, I tend to agree that this is a gee-whiz thing, rather than anything immediately useful. (It could be valuable to pin down the cause of a conveniently-located hardware failure....)

6 posted on 10/10/2002 12:28:11 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
Excerpt from this AP article.

The unprecedented picture show comes with a $760,000 price tag.

The color video camera, an off-the-shelf model just six inches long, costs $2,200. But design and installation of the heavily insulated camera system jacked up the price. Two antennas had to be placed on Atlantis' fuel tank to transmit the video to ground stations, along with an electronics box.

$2200 for the camera, ~$758,000 for integration and pedigree. Seems like a lot to us, but the same camera is used on Delta and Atlas launches at a similar cost. Most of NASA's costs break down in a similar fasion. SR&QA for zero faults is expensive.

7 posted on 10/10/2002 12:51:11 PM PDT by The_Victor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Where the engineers..........did they not realize that the camera would be ineffective?
8 posted on 10/10/2002 12:52:14 PM PDT by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum
here is a link to the latest GOP ad. I got it from Simberg's web site. (800K)

http://www.njgop.org/vertical/Sites/{55B5D1F7-E53F-472C-93CA-F592866E3FB6}/uploads/{AF182DEE-8381-4564-9C71-BC932058657F}.WMV
9 posted on 10/10/2002 1:20:14 PM PDT by cd jones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Victor
$2200 for the camera, ~$758,000 for integration and pedigree. Seems like a lot to us, but the same camera is used on Delta and Atlas launches at a similar cost. Most of NASA's costs break down in a similar fasion. SR&QA for zero faults is expensive.

Or compare it to the $100 billion cost of the space station which is nearly useless.

10 posted on 10/10/2002 2:06:25 PM PDT by Moonman62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
"Or compare it to the $100 billion cost of the space station which is nearly useless."

Who cares, it's just government money! <>

11 posted on 10/10/2002 2:10:50 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum
Thanks for the ping. BTTT
12 posted on 10/10/2002 2:29:00 PM PDT by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson