NASA G2

[BansheeOne]

The German rock band Ramstein, doesn't think much of NASA or American globalization for that matter.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w9EksAo5hY...u%5Ftube%2Ehtml

 

I found it rather untypical for Rammstein when it came out ... to support their carefully crafted bad boy image with their fan base, they should have made an unabashedly pro-American song/video.

[Marek Tucan]

I may be being a bit hyperbolic for effect, but at bottom I'm not joking at all. Standard/Imperial units are based on things in the real, tangible world surrounding man (even if they are arbitrarily sized in some sense). A gallon is a volume that is easy enough to visualize. A pound is a weight equally easy to sense (not to big to pick up, not too small to be meaningless to a human's gross sensory perception). Quarts, pints, and ounces are all easily understood subdivisions of the larger measures.

 

Everything metric is based on powers of ten subdivisions of a single theoretical line that stretches further than a man can see unless he's several thousand miles out in space. While that may be neat and clean mathematically, it doesn't relate man to the world around him. I just don't think that things necessarily should be judged -- or measured -- based on pure utility. Aesthetics do count.

 

I have no problem imagining one meter, though. Or one kilogram. Or one litre. You don't have to know the definition to get the correct idea of the scale, you know? And everything being multiplications of ten really helps. I mean, men do have TEN fingers on their hands, not twelve (IIRC that's how many inches per feet, correct?). So, in this sense, metric units are based much closer to human reality than the Imperial ones

It's true that due to interest in military and history matters I can imagine pound, inch, mile, foot and yard as well, but I still do convert automatically to Metrics.

[X-Files]

?

 

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/26/spaceport...=rss_topstories

 

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- An explosion at an airport home to Scaled Composites -- the builder of the first private manned rocket to reach space -- killed two people and left four seriously hurt Thursday, a Kern County Fire Department official says.

art.mojave.kcal.jpg

 

A bird's eye view of the scene in Mojave, California, shows charred wreckage and large pieces of debris.

 

It happened at the Mojave Air and Space Port during a test of a new rocket motor for SpaceShipTwo -- a spaceship being built for Virgin Galactic, Richard Branson's space tourism company, a source said. The motor uses nitrous oxide, the source said.

[Guest aevans]

I have no problem imagining one meter, though. Or one kilogram. Or one litre. You don't have to know the definition to get the correct idea of the scale, you know? And everything being multiplications of ten really helps. I mean, men do have TEN fingers on their hands, not twelve (IIRC that's how many inches per feet, correct?). So, in this sense, metric units are based much closer to human reality than the Imperial ones

It's true that due to interest in military and history matters I can imagine pound, inch, mile, foot and yard as well, but I still do convert automatically to Metrics.

 

IIRC, the inch is scaled to the distance from the tip of the thumb to the first joint. The foot is, well, a foot long. Back when these things were first standardized, the ratio between an average foot and the end segment of an average thumb was probably closer to 10/1 than 12/1, but the use of a twelve inch foot made it possible to divide the foot evenly divisible into inches by 2, 3, 4, and 6, which was important in a world where people were much more used to thinking in terms of rational fractions rather than decimal fractions. It's still useful today.

[Guest aevans]

?

 

Rocket fuel is dangerous stuff. One of the big reasons we don't have all of the wonders of space travel that were being predicted forty years ago -- and why Virgin Galactic is going to be selling tickets for a million or more, if they ever get off the ground at all -- is that it turns out that the equipment for flying in space is really, really dangerous and you have to go slow and spend a lot of money to be even halfway safe.

[Guest aevans]

Do we need to install one of those breathalyzer starter thingies on the Shuttle flight controls?

 

Panel Finds Astronauts Flew While Intoxicated

 

Considering its safety record, wouldn't you get smashed before flying in the thing?

[TSJ]

I can't believe that with the selection process they have, that somebody would get chosen to be astronaut that would have to get smashed before they get on the shuttle. I've been around a lot of jet pilots and they are down right cocksure of themselves and believe in their capabilities. They are all Cool Hand Lukes, every last one of them. Of course by the time they make it to a Marine fleet jet attack squadron, their mettle has been tested repeatedly.

 

It makes me wonder if the astronaut selection process has been gamed and if it is all about curriculum vitae.

Edited July 27, 2007 by TSJ

[Old Tanker]

Considering its safety record, wouldn't you get smashed before flying in the thing?

 

I agree with you.

 

The original Mercury 7 were known to have a party hardy attitude as depicted in The Right Stuff but I'm a little surprised as I thought this habit of my generation had been PC'd out of favor as to not exist anymore.

[Guest aevans]

I can't believe that with the selection process they have, that somebody would get chosen to be astronaut that would have to get smashed before they get on the shuttle. I've been around a lot of jet pilots and they are down right cocksure of themselves and believe in their capabilities. They are all Cool Hand Lukes, every last one of them. Of course by the time they make it to a Marine fleet jet attack squadron, their mettle has been tested repeatedly.

 

It makes me wonder if the astronaut selection process has been gamed and if it is all about curriculum vitae.

 

Forgotten about Tailhook, haven't we? Pilots can be (some would say are, for the most part) a bunch of lushes. Add into it the nature of a shuttle flight, and I would not at all be surprised that some take the pre-mission attitude: "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we [really may] die."

[TSJ]

Forgotten about Tailhook, haven't we? Pilots can be (some would say are, for the most part) a bunch of lushes. Add into it the nature of a shuttle flight, and I would not at all be surprised that some take the pre-mission attitude: "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we [really may] die."

 

If they do that then they don't need to be astronauts. Also, yeah the pilots in my squadron partied hearty but it was usually after the mission, not before. I would say during the time I served, over half the Corps had some sort of drinking problem. Then get up in the morning and go PT. God Almighty!

 

DUI's, deaths on the highway,etc. were endemic.

 

It looks like a lot of the guys in the Corps now are gym rats.

[Guest aevans]

If they do that then they don't need to be astronauts.

 

Really? I would suspect that the Astronaut Corps, no matter who applies, actually only retains some pretty disturbed individuals. Look at the job description -- go nowhere fast in a program that's not getting anything concrete done.

[ShotMagnet]

Hardly. 'Live the dream, and get paid'. Besides, 'astronaut' on the resume, along with the string of academic credentials necessitant, will guarantee you a job to your liking.

 

 

Shot

[Jim Martin]

Forgotten about Tailhook, haven't we? Pilots can be (some would say are, for the most part) a bunch of lushes. Add into it the nature of a shuttle flight, and I would not at all be surprised that some take the pre-mission attitude: "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we [really may] die."

 

My squadron hosted the Blue Angels when they performed in DC one year; I recall hearing that the night before their performance, they were down at the O Club getting trashed. Can't say that I'd want to be hung over when performing their program, but they seem to be able to function pretty well...

[SCFalken]

Word is that the explosion was a SpaceShipTwo engine.

 

Update:

Rutan said the blast did not involve a rocket firing but happened during a test of the flow of nitrous oxide through an injector in the course of testing components for a new rocket motor for the upcoming SpaceShipTwo.

 

Falken

Edited July 27, 2007 by SCFalken

[Guest aevans]

Hardly. 'Live the dream, and get paid'. Besides, 'astronaut' on the resume, along with the string of academic credentials necessitant, will guarantee you a job to your liking.

Shot

 

If you can meet the paper qualifications to even apply for astronaut, you have no problem getting a job.

[SCFalken]

Without significant industry/career experience, NASA won't go near you without a PhD/MD (Engineering, Physical and Life Sciences only).

 

IIRC, it works out to >5 yrs work in your field, if you only have a BS, 2-3 yrs if you have an MS. Postdocs are eligible immediately.

 

That's just to get the CV across the table. The field is winnowed down sharply from there.

 

The above is for Mission Specialists. Pilots (who eventually become Commanders) are almost exclusively military aviators, with multi-thousand hour experience in jet aircraft. They only need BS-level academic quals.

 

Chances are the "Pilot" slots will go the way of the Dodo, once the STS is retired (the Orion isn't a "flyer"). Everyone will be in the "Mission Specialist" category.

 

 

Anyone know the current size of the active Astronaut Corps?

 

 

Falken

Edited July 28, 2007 by SCFalken

[philgollin]

A comment above about the issue of what skills were required for 6 month missions to the moon's surface raised the question about what happens to the command and service modules in lunar orbit whilst the surface work is in progress ?

 

Will it be shut down and allowed to cool down or will it have solar panels and be kept powered up (to a limited extent) ? It seems quite a difficult problem to leave a man-rated spaceship alone for 6 months and expect it to work properly every time. (I know the Soyuz TM sit at the space station for months at a time, but they are connected to the station and are simpler designs).

 

Any ideas ?

[TSJ]

A comment above about the issue of what skills were required for 6 month missions to the moon's surface raised the question about what happens to the command and service modules in lunar orbit whilst the surface work is in progress ?

 

Will it be shut down and allowed to cool down or will it have solar panels and be kept powered up (to a limited extent) ? It seems quite a difficult problem to leave a man-rated spaceship alone for 6 months and expect it to work properly every time. (I know the Soyuz TM sit at the space station for months at a time, but they are connected to the station and are simpler designs).

 

Any ideas ?

 

The Ares is rated to haul 6 people. They're going to have to leave some of them and then come back and get them. How this will work for lunar mining is another question. One of the big draws for the moon is getting the H3 out the soil. The Russians are angry that we haven't formally invited them for this enterprise.

 

Also, I don't know how this is going to work for Mars.

Edited July 28, 2007 by TSJ

[Tommy Bennett]

Forgotten about Tailhook, haven't we? Pilots can be (some would say are, for the most part) a bunch of lushes. Add into it the nature of a shuttle flight, and I would not at all be surprised that some take the pre-mission attitude: "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we [really may] die."

 

The only pilot I've hung out with is a good friend who drinks at the same watering hole and speaks of his trips abroad in terms of where they partied when they got there and the girls they met.

 

Tho it's unspoken between us, I can easily see the connection to Shakespeare!

[SCFalken]

And in other news, the X-48b BWB flew for the first time:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291065,00.html

 

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. — An experimental jet that resembles a flying wing successfully flew for the first time in a program that could lead to more fuel-efficient, quieter and higher-capacity aircraft, NASA said Thursday.

 

The remotely controlled, 500-pound, three-engine jet with a 21-foot wingspan took off July 20, climbed to an altitude of 7,500 feet and landed about a half-hour later, NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center said.

 

 

Falken

[SCFalken]

Also, I don't know how this is going to work for Mars.

 

 

Likely, the Mars expeditions will be conducted with a hybrid of Constellation/Orion (Ares I and V) and Mars Semi-Direct (Hab + Mars Ascent Vehicle + Earth Return Vehicle) systems and concepts. Ares V has the throw weight required for the Mars Direct/Semi-Direct style expeditions. MD/SD has the optimal configuration for fast transit (180 days out, same back, no Venus flyby, minimizing radiation exposure) and endurance (~500 days on Mars).

 

We probably won't even see a coherent concept for Mars until ~2020.

 

 

Falken

Edited July 28, 2007 by SCFalken

[Guest aevans]

Chances are the "Pilot" slots will go the way of the Dodo, once the STS is retired (the Orion isn't a "flyer"). Everyone will be in the "Mission Specialist" category.

 

I know Zubrin and others have been advocating this for a while now, but it ignores basic human nature. You can't have a crew with nothing but research scientists who think no decision can or should be made without a committee meeting. You have to have someone in command who knows how to command, no matter that it costs a scientist slot on a limited crew roster.

Edited July 28, 2007 by aevans

[SCFalken]

I know Zubrin and others have been advocating this for a while now, but it ignores basic human nature. You can't have a crew with nothing but research scientists who think no decision can or should be made without a committee meeting. You have to have someone in command who knows how to command, no matter that it costs a scientist slot on a limited crew roster.

 

 

You misunderstand. I'm merely speaking of the "pilot" (guy who flies) slot, and why it may go away. Of course there will still be a CO, that's a completely seperate issue (if nothing else, someone has to be on-site with the authority to determine, causa finita, what gets done on a daily basis), and military personnel are not automatically in the running for it, this being the Astronaut community.

 

I don't buy into Zubrin's "plucky scientists uber alles" theory, but he is correct that expending 1/4 or 1/6 of your expedition slots on a person who is only useful for 5% of the mission is a non-starter. You can likely train a Geologist to land the Hab (if it isn't 100% automated) far better than you can train an F15 pilot to be a research Geologist. Likely, the COs of the Mars expeditions will be drawn from a group of senior Astronauts who also possess the scientific quals needed to justify their presence on the mission (no Math PhD's, regardless of how experienced they are, but Biologists or Chemists would be in the running). On Apollo 17, for instance, Schmitt (a civilian Geologist) was the pilot of the Lander.

 

The Test Pilot era is largely coming to an end, for manned spaceflight at least.

 

 

Falken

Edited July 28, 2007 by SCFalken

[Guest aevans]

You misunderstand. I'm merely speaking of the "pilot" (guy who flies) slot, and why it may go away. Of course there will still be a CO, that's a completely seperate issue (if nothing else, someone has to be on-site with the authority to determine, causa finita, what gets done on a daily basis), and military personnel are not automatically in the running for it, this being the Astronaut community.

 

On the contrary, only military personnel should be considered fit for command. The commander's professional qualifications are not a "completely seperate issue" by any stretch of the imagination. That's why I said the person in command has to know how to command.

 

I don't buy into Zubrin's "plucky scientists uber alles" theory, but he is correct that expending 1/4 or 1/6 of your expedition slots on a person who is only useful for 5% of the mission is a non-starter. You can likely train a Geologist to land the Hab (if it isn't 100% automated) far better than you can train an F15 pilot to be a research Geologist. Likely, the COs of the Mars expeditions will be drawn from a group of senior Astronauts who also possess the scientific quals needed to justify their presence on the mission (no Math PhD's, regardless of how experienced they are, but Biologists or Chemists would be in the running).

To be quite honest, the idea that the pilot/craft commander/whatever you want to call him only has duties that occupy him 5% of the entire mission schedule is ludicrous. Who does the PMs on life support and other mission critical equipment? Who is best qualified to lead EVAs and ensure EVA safety when he doesn't go out himself? Who is the most qualified to maintain discipline and ensure the crew stays on the job? Somebody who has a secondary duty to do all of those things, or somebody who is aboard to do those things? And that's a full time job.

 

On Apollo 17, for instance, Schmitt (a civilian Geologist) was the pilot of the Lander.

 

No, he wasn't. The title of Lunar Madule Pilot was created as a sop to the egos of those pilots who had play second banana to the Mission Commander, who was actually flying the LM. Schmitt was a trained pilot and did have the minimum number of jet hours to be an astronaut, but he would never have been handed the controls to anything on the actual mission unless Cernan was incapacitated -- and then only if they were already by themselves in the LM and had to get back to the CSM.

 

The Test Pilot era is largely coming to an end, for manned spaceflight at least.

 

Maybe test pilots per se, but I think there are plenty of reasons, all of them good, to keep a mission commander position and put a trained military pilot in it.

Edited July 28, 2007 by aevans

[SCFalken]

Maybe test pilots per se, but I think there are plenty of reasons, all of them good, to keep a mission commander position and put a trained military pilot in it.

 

I'm willing to bet that we won't see a "pilot" on the Lunar or (especially) the Mars expeditions. You might see military personnel who also have significant academic quals in the appropriate areas, but I'm doubting they will also be from the Aviation community.

 

Falken