hello NASA, using the old junk box?

On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jul 2005 08:18:47 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

OK, but I did read they want something that can fly to the moon, and then from there to mars. They will have to design SOMETHING new, as the Apollos are scrapped... Also funny is that I did read on CNN yesterday that now Russia (with 1/10 of the budget) will make a new 'Soyuz' spacecraft.

Will there be a space-race? China can produce without all that paperwork as a military project, at a fraction of the cost (also labor cost), no patent worries, excellent 'espionage', Russia knows very well how to make spacecraft, look how long Mir orbited... Very few launch problems. And they can work cheap too. I dunno if Russia has the same paperwork hassle, but I doubt it. Surely an 'experimental' status would be assigned, and any paperwork done after it flies? That would be documentation.

On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jul 2005 10:51:10 -0400) it happened keith wrote in :

I dunno, Formula 1 racing has Mercedes leading now. Do not underestimate the British too. But indeed with China and India putting out millions from the universities... But why would anyone come to America? They would only come if captured in secret CIA operations, like in Italy. ;-)

Not a single craft (I hope).

The Apollo program did the research on this a long time ago and came to the realization that each segment of a mission is best served by a craft optimized for that part.

Smart thinking might come up with some designs that would serve similar legs of several missions. Putting astronauts into LEO and re-entry, for example, needs to be done for many missions. But putting cargo into LEO is better done by a different sort of craft (unmanned, probably).

Getting from LEO to lunar or Mars orbit has different requirements and is better served by not hauling a lot of garbage along that isn't needed for most of the trip. No sense hauling heat shields and parachutes needed for earth re-entry all the way to the moon and back.

Yep. Just ask Boeing.

The 'paperwork hassle' can be mitigated with some careful planning. Having been in the aviation biz, I was amazed at how much paperwork was just 'FAA appeasement documentation' and had little bearing on the actual design.

The engine and drive-train, AFAIK. THe reest sorta looks like a Ford. What part of an F1 is sold to Merc buyers? ...though that was hardly my point.

BTW, your clipping is a little tight.

I care,

The nose, and tail section are supplied by the automotive manufacturer (Ford , Chevy Dodge). The rest of the car is fabricated by the race team. Engines may be built in house or purchased from one of the engine builders in the sport.

-JATO

-JATO

GOOD! That's the way we should be doing it! And I understand the Egyptians are quite good at the torture ;-)

...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | |

On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:59:06 -0400) it happened keith wrote in :

That has nothing to do with Steve Jobs I think?

There are a lot of suice bombers too.

Read this:

Not only are there black helies, they use nice business jets these days. So YMMV.

Like Yoda, you are. Five pounds, I claim.

--

--------------------------------------+------------------------------------ Mike Brown: mjb[at]pootle.demon.co.uk |

Yes. I was about to jump on that. My girlfriend has a relatively new Mercedes - hauls ass when it isn't in the shop. The power train is strong, but everything else is junk.

Bob

most nascars use the ford 9" rear axle, the fords use a ford engine block, the rest is all special race stuff.

block,

Unmodified?

Agreed.

IIRC, the block must be "stock", but is detailed to exact clearance specifications, etc.

...Jim Thompson

Must be from a museum somewhere ;) last time I looked it was pushrods, distributors and carburators, who would even dream of building cars like that anymore?

-Lasse

Ford never made museum pieces? BTW, that' my understanding too, but I'd have to ask someone how gives a s*it. How NASCAR widgets are built wasn't the point at all.

Actually, many of these devices were developed by the large aerospace companies in the 60s and 70s. The technology is not especially complex, and the general weight of the whole system was some 70Kg to land one person safely.

Google moose orbital

I have a 6DS4 right here in my desk tray. Actually not much bigger than a transistor from the late '50's, early '60's.

...Jim Thompson

What a sheltered life you've lived. :( The Nuvistor was in a lot of consumer electronics in the US. It was used in millions of RCA TV sets in the tuner as the VHF RF pre-amp. It was used in garage door openers, "Sonar" used them in their two way VHF business radios, Tektronics used them in some of their scopes, and they were used in some amateur radio equipment, both commercial and home brew. It was a cheap "jellybean" part in the '60s and '70s here, in the US. I still have a few NOS 6CW4 and 13DS4 Nuvistors for spares because I collect old test equipment for the fun of it, and I want every piece to work like it is supposed to.

On a sunny day (Fri, 29 Jul 2005 22:29:10 GMT) it happened "Michael A. Terrell" wrote in :

Ah, well I think nuvistor never made it big into TV here. As for keeping the equipment with original parts, in my school days I got hold of some old tube TV (with round CRT very old), and then started replacing everything little by little with the 'transistors'. Not as easy as you may think, tuner, IF amp, video amp (high voltage oops), vertical deflection (AHHHH), and finally horizontal deflection and EHT. And audio of cause. I used the first Motorola transistors for car ignition in the horizontal stage, these were too slow for 15kHz switching, and could just handle the voltage. Anyways not a single piece of 'test equipment' or any other 'equipment' did not get modified or copied with transistors, or chips even. Anyways, I now remember I have seen some RF amps too... But transistors were so much more exiting, no heater voltage! It allowed me to design a small vidicon camera powered by nicads, with build in TV transmitter, around 1968.... The problem here was the vidicon heaters, too much current, nicads empty in an hour or so, but with toobs or nuvistors would have lasted only 10 minutes.

What was wrong with the 709 opamp ;-)?