have
technology
multiple-use=20
and=20
would be=20
not=20
of=20
=20
gases at=20
was=20
necessary at=20
them
Stuff your hate up your backside.
Propose better and get it built.
This not so much as saying the shuttle could have done better, but your mindless bashing can only be from political brainwashing.
=46or starters name any program that placed more items or tonnage in = orbit successfully.
small
Yes but the delta v of 50000 kph+ on top of 30000 kph escape velocity to get it to the rock in time is a bitch. Try looking up specific impulse.
=20
=46ind and read the reports before spouting again. 'Taint all that hard.
have
technology
multiple-use
and
be
at
was
at
Not quite the issue. Hunt down the reports; the problems that led to the second vehicle loss (disaster) were part of the solutions to the first failure. (How is that for management doublespeak.)
Your bigotry is well known.
That's
Your bigotry is noted.
the
yet.
down
Your bigotry is clear.
What was it the Einstein said when he quit the Patent Office? No that was somebody else.
other
This is correct. There is a massive difference in orbital life, see also Mir and Skylab which "fell down". They were way too damn expensive to put up only to have them fall down.
So that is why you are such a bigot. Your weren't watching in a kid in a schoolroom then were you? Did your kids questions defeat you?
Soyuz? Just a guess, but the system was used for a *long* time. Crude, but functional.
Not to mention greenie approved insulation foam.
130ish, according to:
That's
And this has changed since the 1950s when and how? Go Ralph Nader repeat-a-clone go. =20
Try putting the same standards you require of your employees to your elected representatives.
I'd answer that question if it made any sense at all.
John
No, that was the British Empire. It's blunders still cause problems for everyone.
That's
Hmmph. A whitewash paper.
See Roger Boujlais (SP??) in IEEE Spectrum.
That's
shot
300new
of
billion
existing
of
=20
=20
constraints.
The real problem was some Proxmire droid "cost cutters" trying to make a name for their selves.
As gov'ment programs go it worked pretty well for over 20 years, lots of people productively employed over the years. Now compare the gub'ment bailouts of the last 20 months and the liberal inspired housing bubble and meltdown for a tab that is at least 10 times larger. Which do you prefer? Do you vote that way?
They funded two mirrors for Hubble, and they made one wrong and one right, and then launched the bad one. It was a cultural problem, not a money problem.
John
Productively employed? What did they produce? All those people could have been working in industries doing actual productive work. Instead, we spent hundreds of billions putting crews in smelly tin cans in harm's way, with no payback, and spent trillions more importing stuff we don't make any more.
That's the real payback when you pay tens of thousands of good scientists and engineers, in government and industry, to waste time.
John
On a sunny day (Sat, 05 Jun 2010 08:07:03 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :
Future is here:
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required