29-07-2005 22:22									#61
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

That's not even the half of it, boann. Critical systems are triple or quadruple redundant.

This becomes a huge problem in cost, when your designers don't design for simplicity.

	29-07-2005 22:26									#62
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

So the Russian fired seven rockets. Is that all?

Meanwhile, launched at least three new projects.

Plus, there were the existing program like the Hubble and other existing space craft.

Then there is the extremely important research conducted by NASA, such as developing nuclear powered propulsion, experimental physics programs,

Then there's the work on projects that will be launched at a later date. For instance, last year, NASA was working on Deep Impact comet mission. Plus there is money spent to develop a replacement for the shuttle. And money spent on developing new engines for aircraft.

There are NASA projects that monitor and collect information on the earth's environment which is vital to understand and preventing pollution.

Oh, and then there's NASA education program.

Much of this is work that will pay dividends in years to come, and most importantly, work that the private sector would never fund because it does not provide a profit in the next quarter.

Sorry, the idea that the Russian space program is more efficient and does what NASA does on 1/20th of the budget is just laughable.

	29-07-2005 22:28									#63
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by DanS Critical systems are triple or quadruple redundant.

That's not unusual. The typical airliner today carries triple redundancy on major components.

	29-07-2005 22:30									#64
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Sorry, the idea that the Russian space program is more efficient and does what NASA does on 1/20th of the budget is just laughable.

That's a straw man. I never said that Russia does what NASA does on 1/20th of the budget.

	29-07-2005 22:35									#65
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

It's not a straw man.

This is what you said:

quote: Originally posted by DanS They acquit themselves well on a budget that is economical.

You were trying to say that the Russians are efficient while NASA was not.

Yet the Russians are doing a fraction of what NASA does. And you haven't shown that the Russians "acquit themselves well on a budget that is economical. " It is clear that the Russians aren't doing a hell of a lot compared to what NASA is doing.

	29-07-2005 22:38									#66
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai So the Russian fired seven rockets. Is that all?

The Russian civil space authority launched 7, which is over 10% of the total launched worldwide for the year. In the same period, NASA launched 3.

quote: Meanwhile, launched at least three new projects.

And Russia launched one.

quote: Then there is the extremely important research conducted by NASA, such as developing nuclear powered propulsion, experimental physics programs,

Most of this is funded by DOE and DOD, not NASA.

quote: There are NASA projects that monitor and collect information on the earth's environment which is vital to understand and preventing pollution.

As Russia does.

quote: Oh, and then there's NASA education program.

Which is worthless, IMO.

	29-07-2005 22:39									#67
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai It's not a straw man.

It is too. Stop being obtuse. The Russians are doing a large fraction of what NASA is doing, but is spending a small fraction of the money. IOW, they are much more efficient than NASA.

	29-07-2005 23:00									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Come off it Dan. The only one being obtuse is you.

The idea that the Russian are doing a "large" fraction of what NASA is doing is just stupid.

There is no way to prove that the Russians are more efficient because they have different budgets and are doing different things. Your comparision is pointless.

And you put forth another strawman with your comment that other US agencies are working on things like nuclear-power propulsion. That doesn't take away from the fact that NASA is working on it and that it is part of the NASA budget.

As for you comment that education is useless, well, that's just a classic Conservative response.

The problem with you Dan is that you're letting your ideology blind you to reality. You hate government agencies so much that you can't see the important work that is being done by NASA. You're as bad as the idoleague who claim that globalization is simply a bad thing when we both know that there pluses and minuses.

	29-07-2005 23:09									#69
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker Probes are mostly a waste too, they sent Magellan to Venus for study. The argument I heard at the time from the weenies at JPL was we wanted to find out why Venus had a runaway greenhouse effect so we could prevent the same thing from happening here. We didn't need to send a probe for that, Venus is upside down, not rotating much at all, and ~ no magnetic field to deflect solar radiation. JPL knew all that and they still sold that waste of money to us with lies.

OMFG, Magellan was a evil librul plot to help the eco-nuts and distroy the US economy!1!!1!

Magellan's main purpose, if I remember right, was to map the surface. Vesuvian geology was barely known before Magellan, and many scientists wanted to know if Venus has plate tectonics. Magellan confirmed that Venus has no plate tectonics, which supported the hypothesis that subduction requires oceans to work.


Anyway, NASA needs to concentrate on exploration (manned mssion to Mars, search for life on Europa) and research (new, better, larger space telescopes; such as a planned space-based interferometer that will search for earth-like planets) and quit being a ferry service for private satellites. NASA shpuld lay the foundations of the colonization of the Solar Sysytem and beyond. I want Humanity to spread across the galaxy, not be stuck on Earth because of shortsighted people who only care about the here and now.

	29-07-2005 23:18									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: There is no way to prove that the Russians are more efficient because they have different budgets and are doing different things. Your comparision is pointless.

The Russians spend about $60 million to put 3 people in space while the US spends about $1.2 billion to put 7 people in space. The numbers don't lie. The Russians are much more efficient, safe, and capable on manned programs than NASA.

I am amazed that me defending a communist-legacy space program leads to me being accused of being ideological.

	29-07-2005 23:21									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

No, the shuttle missions typically do scientific reseach, which the Russian missions do not.

But yes, if NASA paid poverty level wages, it could do things a lot cheaper, but it can't because it has to compete with the American labour market for people.

	29-07-2005 23:24									#72
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

See my edit, above, about ideology. And in any event, the research done by the Shuttle on orbit is rather miniscule and not at all timely.

	29-07-2005 23:28									#73
	Increase the size of your Attachments

IMHO,
There is too much emphasis on safety. If you want to go into space you should accept that there is a small chance you will DIE. I think that we would have moved further along the path of exploration if almost every aspect of space travel was not government controlled.
I also think that the U.S. should have a government space program that is not a monopoly. A program that does research into areas that are beneficial to Americans specifically and the world.
I think that we should take risks and experiment with new ideas and designs at a faster rate and for less money. One good way is to deregulate and take the safeties off. There are more ways to get into space than to rely on spacecraft designs that are older than a modern destroyer.

	29-07-2005 23:30									#74
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Typical capitalist: only concerned about "timely" results, no ability to take a long term view.

The shuttle provides the only way to do these experiments.

You are blinded by ideology. You only look at the dollars spent without looking at the results. And yes, it is funny that your ideological fanaticism puts you in a position where you use one government program to undermine another government program.

	29-07-2005 23:33									#75
	Suffering from ads?

quote: only concerned about "timely" results, no ability to take a long term view.

Let me put it this way. If you want to do a scientific experiment on the Shuttle, then the waiting list is decades long. As a scientist, you can't do effective scientific research this way. You'll retire before making any headway. The results just aren't timely enough to be of any use.

quote: And yes, it is funny that your ideological fanaticism puts you in a position where you use one government program to undermine another government program.

That is the only relevant comparison available.

	29-07-2005 23:35									#76
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Pax IMHO, There is too much emphasis on safety. If you want to go into space you should accept that there is a small chance you will DIE. I think that we would have moved further along the path of exploration if almost every aspect of space travel was not government controlled.

Yeah, like the American public would tolerate more disasters.

quote: Originally posted by Pax I also think that the U.S. should have a government space program that is not a monopoly.

What monopoly? The Europeans, Russians, Japanese and Chinese have space programs.

And there's nothing stopping the private sector from doing these programs, but the private sector won't do it because much of what NASA does is science with no immediate return and the private sector is not going to invest hundreds of billions of dollars into something that won't create a profit in the next quarter.

The private sector space programs being developed now are limited compared to what governments are doing, and based on a very small number of rich people with money to throw away.

	29-07-2005 23:36									#77
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: The private sector space programs being developed now are limited compared to what governments are doing

I'm sorry but that's wrong with regard to human space flight. Flat wrong. In most respects, they are much more ambitious.

I can detail these efforts, if you wish.

	29-07-2005 23:38									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by DanS Let me put it this way. If you want to do a scientific experiment on the Shuttle, then the waiting list is decades long. As a scientist, you can't do effective scientific research this way. You'll retire before making any headway. The results just aren't timely enough to be of any use.

And the reason why there is such a long list... Is because many scientists see the value, and want the oppotunity, to do these experiments so obvious there is a value and it is timely for those who get their experiments on the missions.

	29-07-2005 23:39									#79
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by DanS I'm sorry but that's wrong with regard to human space flight. Flat wrong. In most respects, they are much more ambitious. I can detail these efforts, if you wish.

Go ahead. There has been one flight into the outer reaches of the earth's atmosphere.

The private sector is incapable of funding substantial space exploration.

	29-07-2005 23:39									#80
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: And the reason why there is such a long list... Is because many scientists see the value, and want the oppotunity, to do these experiments so obvious there is a value and it is timely for those who get their experiments on the missions.

The demand might be there, but the supply of Shuttle research time is miniscule.

	29-07-2005 23:40									#81
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Yeah, like the American public would tolerate more disasters. What monopoly? The Europeans, Russians, Japanese and Chinese have space programs. And there's nothing stopping the private sector from doing these programs, but the private sector won't do it because much of what NASA does is science with no immediate return and the private sector is not going to invest hundreds of billions of dollars into something that won't create a profit in the next quarter. The private sector space programs being developed now are limited compared to what governments are doing, and based on a very small number of rich people with money to throw away.

I'm saying that the Americans, the government and astronauts should all accept the risk/likelihood of eventual deaths.

All the space programs you mentioned are basically monopolies in there countries. At least, in america there are regulations and restrictions on information that would prevent most private corporations from attempting to get into space.

	29-07-2005 23:41									#82
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by DanS The demand might be there, but the supply of Shuttle research time is miniscule.

Only because there is a lack of funding.

	29-07-2005 23:43									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Pax I'm saying that the Americans, the government and astronauts should all accept the risk/likelihood of eventual deaths.

Yes, I think we agree that the idea of exploring space without accidents is stupid.

quote: Originally posted by Pax All the space programs you mentioned are basically monopolies in there countries. At least, in america there are regulations and restrictions on information that would prevent most private corporations from attempting to get into space.

But there is nothing stopping the private sector from developing space flight, except for the fact that it is not a profitable enterprise so the private sector won't do it. The lack of private sector space exploration has nothing to do with rules and regulations. It's just a function of the capitalist system. This is why we need government programs like NASA.

	29-07-2005 23:46									#84
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Go ahead. There has been one flight into the outer reaches of the earth's atmosphere. The private sector is incapable of funding substantial space exploration.

Bigelow Aerospace is pursuing an R&D track of expandable space station modules. The near-term goal (~ 5 years) is to launch a $100 million module that provides on-orbit volume equal to the size of the ISS as currently constructed and is an order of magnitude safer. The R&D is fully funded to the tune of about $500 million.

SpaceX is pursuing a manned capsule capable of launching 5 or 6 astronauts at a cost of about $25 million a launch. This is expected by the end of the decade. The first round of R&D is fully funded to the tune of about $100 million.

These are not the suborbital efforts about which you are thinking.

	29-07-2005 23:47									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

My point Tingkai is that somewhere on a shelf is a design for a spaceship that works better than the current shuttle but we can't use that because it has not been approved by the government and in order to get approval it would have to go through this massive bureacratic gauntlet and to get funding for it we would have to subsidize farming in Iowa increasing the cost and safety changes would have to be made that would increase the weight of the ship, increasing the size, increasing the fuel requirements, increasing the cost and etc..
i'd rather allocate a region of desert that would allow the risk takers to experiment and die and discover. In the Spirit of Columbus and Magellan.

	29-07-2005 23:51									#86
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: But there is nothing stopping the private sector from developing space flight, except for the fact that it is not a profitable enterprise so the private sector won't do it.

You're too late. They are doing it.

	29-07-2005 23:52									#87
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Pax My point Tingkai is that somewhere on a shelf is a design for a spaceship that works better than the current shuttle but we can't use that because it has not been approved by the government.

Do you know that for a fact? If it is true, I'd like to hear about it.

	29-07-2005 23:55									#88
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

The reason why everythin is inventoried and tripple checked is because of anti-waste programs.

	29-07-2005 23:58									#89
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by DanS Bigelow Aerospace is pursuing an R&D track of expandable space station modules. The near-term goal (~ 5 years) is to launch a $100 million module that provides on-orbit volume equal to the size of the ISS as currently constructed and is an order of magnitude safer. The R&D is fully funded to the tune of about $500 million. SpaceX is pursuing a manned capsule capable of launching 5 or 6 astronauts at a cost of about $25 million a launch. This is expected by the end of the decade. The first round of R&D is fully funded to the tune of about $100 million. These are not the suborbital efforts about which you are thinking.

So after decades of space flight we have a couple of companies making a huge gamble, one that is likely to build on work done by NASA.

And where is the money coming from. Odds are that it is coming from billionares who have no real expectation of making a profit.

Again, it's not substantial exploration. It's simply the pipe dream of some billionaires and it is likely to end up like previous underfunded attempts at getting into space.

$100 million, or $500 million is piss in the pot when we're dealing with advanced technology like space exploration.

	30-07-2005 00:05									#90
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: So after decades of space flight we have a couple of companies making a huge gamble, one that is likely to build on work done by NASA.

All things new require a large gamble. There is no shame in it. Also, there's no shame in building on the experience and mistakes of NASA.

quote: And where is the money coming from. Odds are that it is coming from billionares who have no real expectation of making a profit.

On the contrary, they expect to make a profit. That might not be the primary reason they are doing it, but they know that if their programs don't make money, then their programs will not be sustainable.

quote: $100 million, or $500 million is piss in the pot when we're dealing with advanced technology like space exploration.

Yes, it's not much money compared with what NASA consumes. That's the point. You can be rather more ambitious in what you want to do, if your costs are low. In any event, I'm afraid to say that this is all 40 year old technology. Hardly cutting edge.