|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
 Posted - 09/10/2002 : 12:43:04
|
While I feel a tiny bit of indignation (who the hell says someone has to get permission from the government to go to the moon?!  ) , it's one more step that I'm glad we are taking.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2249064.stm
The fact that the government doesn't seem at all worried that when this company's photos are developed, no evidence of a prior landing will be seen seems to me to be a big blow to any Moon hoax proponents out there.
------------
The NASA Vision:
To improve life here,
To extend life to there,
To find life beyond.
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
 Posted - 12/06/2002 : 11:55:37 [Permalink]
|
The article saysquote:
The launch is set for June 2003 from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.
Maybe the Government think that there is no chance whatsoever that they will get there---and so don't care that they might find or might not find. 
I wholeheartedly agree with your indignation---but my feelings are not "a tiny bit of..."! 
More interesting is the this paragraph from the article:quote:
The US State Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have granted the company permission to send its TrailBlazer spacecraft into lunar orbit.
The State Department  Hmmmmmm. And the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration? Double "hmmmmmm". Maybe even triple "hmmmmmm".
What do the Government know that they are not telling us? Hmmmmmm! 
|
Do thou amend thy face, and I'll amend my life. --Falstaff |
 |
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2002 : 11:46:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
What do the Government know that they are not telling us? Hmmmmmm!
I doubt it is anything along the line of moon-hoaxes or Alien invaders, but probably more along the line of money. As in: They know how cheap scientific exploration of space really can really be and don't want taxpayers to find out. |
To any insufficiently advanced person technolgy becomes indistinguishable from magic. |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2002 : 15:51:53 [Permalink]
|
Interesting...anyone hear about the $1 million prize offered to whoever can manage the first private space flight?
From what I hear, one group already has a plan...they hope to lift the capsule to the proper height with a balloon and then fire the rockets to reach space. Then the balloon acts in addition to the parachutes to slow the craft for reentry. |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2002 : 17:21:31 [Permalink]
|
Skeptic Alert !
They plan to 'tow' a balloon into space, and what's left of it, will act as a parachute?!?
Isn't domain determined by how far your biggest gun can shoot? |
 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2002 : 18:10:10 [Permalink]
|
There is a private company that has been launching payloads into orbit for years. Shouldn't they already have collected the $1 million? What is that company...Arianna or something like that?
@tomic |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Physiofly
Skeptic Friend
USA
90 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2002 : 21:31:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
...anyone hear about the $1 million prize offered to whoever can manage the first private space flight?
Actually, it's $10 million. It's called the X-prize http://www.xprize.com/ |
"Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a
deceiver will never lack victims for his deceptions." - Niccolo Machiavelli
|
|
|
|
Kilted_Warrior
Skeptic Friend
Canada
118 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2002 : 21:34:02 [Permalink]
|
There's more than just getting to space for the X-prize,
You have to launch, comeback, and be ready for another launch with the same vehicle in something like two weeks. Some of the entrants have really neat looking designs. |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2002 : 07:52:45 [Permalink]
|
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana,Arial,Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by NubiWan
They plan to 'tow' a balloon into space, and what's left of it, will act as a parachute?!?
[/quote]
Not really, it will act in addition to the parachutes. The designers are well aware of the fact that the balloon will most likely be shredded during the powered ascent. But since the only effect that the remains of the balloon could possibly have is to slow the descent (which is desirable), they thought it would be best not to detach the ballon before powered ascent.
BTW, I think that the reason why the government wants to approve all launches is because of airspace security reasons. I mean, what would the U.S. be able to tell the Chinese if an unauthorized rocket malfunctioned and crash landed in their territory? |
| Edited by - Infamous on 12/10/2002 07:55:28 |
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2002 : 08:39:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lars_H
quote:
Originally posted by Computer Org
What do the Government know that they are not telling us? Hmmmmmm!
I doubt it is anything along the line of moon-hoaxes or Alien invaders, but probably more along the line of money. As in: They know how cheap scientific exploration of space really can really be and don't want taxpayers to find out.
I was sort-of joking, Lars, but you might well be 100% correct. It's been years since I read the history, but I recall that the U.S. (mostly the then-being formed Defence Dept. and Air Force Department) mostly ignored rocketry and space in the early days.
Although not as bad as the court-marshalling of Army Brig.-Gen. Billy Mitchell for daring to insist that airplanes would be important in the next war (--WW II--), I think that the "military industrial complex" actively stiffled 1940s rocket research, despite the all-too-obvious success of the V-1 and V-2 rockets used against the British Isles. Maybe they were pushing airplanes and didn't want any competition from alternatives.
In fact, IIRC, most of early rocketry research (with an eye toward space) was done by private organizations and individuals--outside the purview of the U.S. Government.
In the end, though, reality seems to have won out: Hardly anybody worries about B-52s delivering nukes; they worry about ICBMs. We are not the least concerned about a threat from Iraq's Air Force as a weapon-delivery system; we are, however, worried about their rocketry.
But: Surely in my wee joke, you haven't found a money-driven conspiracy. Or have you? |
Do thou amend thy face, and I'll amend my life. --Falstaff |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2002 : 10:22:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
While I feel a tiny bit of indignation (who the hell says someone has to get permission from the government to go to the moon?!  ) , it's one more step that I'm glad we are taking.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2249064.stm
The fact that the government doesn't seem at all worried that when this company's photos are developed, no evidence of a prior landing will be seen seems to me to be a big blow to any Moon hoax proponents out there.
------------
The NASA Vision:
To improve life here,
To extend life to there,
To find life beyond.
Just one tiny thing. Isn't the permission over flight plans? Right now, if you want to fly from point A to point B in a private plane at commercial altitudes, you have to file a flight plan and have it approved. If you don't, there's a big chance of a sudden get up close and personal with an airliner.
Same thing with space launches. When Arrianne sends up a package, they have to file a flight plan with the other nations. This is true of NASA. The big diff is the heavier contact and brighter flash of uncontrolled combustion with colliding space-bound platforms than aircraft collisions.
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2002 : 10:29:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kilted_Warrior
There's more than just getting to space for the X-prize,
You have to launch, comeback, and be ready for another launch with the same vehicle in something like two weeks. Some of the entrants have really neat looking designs.
I was looking at the requirements of the X-prize.
In addition to the strictures you mention, (and this is the biggie) no more than 10% of the non-propellant mass can be replaced between launches. |
|
|
|
Kilted_Warrior
Skeptic Friend
Canada
118 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2002 : 11:28:56 [Permalink]
|
I've seen some of the contestant's craft. I think it will be done within the next few years.
Yes, that fuel one is a biggie, and two weeks will be able to beat NASA's best record by a longshot.
How much would you pay for 15 minutes of microgravity? (This is the X prize)
The lunar one will not take place for many more years.
|
| Edited by - Kilted_Warrior on 12/10/2002 11:30:30 |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 12/11/2002 : 08:25:23 [Permalink]
|
Wow, I had forgotten about this thread. I usually don't even check in here much since most posts have to do with the BABB...
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
[brIsn't the permission over flight plans?
According to the article: quote:
To get federal blessing it had to prove the Trailblazer satellite would not contaminate the Moon with biological material, pollute the lunar surface or disturb previous landing sites.
If they are launching from Kazakhstan, and the moon doesn't belong to anyone, what right does the U.S. .gov have to tell anyone they can go to the moon or not? "Disturb previous landing sites"? Maybe they did more up there than they are telling us!  There's an Area 51 on the moon already! |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/12/2002 : 08:25:52 [Permalink]
|
| Well, if the moon was contaminated with biological material or a landing site was disturbed, we'd probably have a bunch of nuts claiming that there were bacteria there all along, and that some aliens blasted a hole in the Apollo lander. |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
