Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

$78,000,000.00 of your money, smashed in the moon.

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 10111213>
Author
StormyKnight View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2980
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote StormyKnight Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 January 2010 at 10:51pm
Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

More proof that FE will bash Obama for everything he does, even if it coincides with his own views.
"WAAHHHH! OBAMA IS BEING FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE!"
Wait wait.  Obama favors a multi-trillion dollar budget and trumpets how he'll freeze spending to the tune of $250 billion over 10 years?  Really?  This is fiscally responsible?
Back to Top
slackerr26 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Strike 2 - language, 8/20

Joined: 24 June 2008
Location: Russian Federation
Status: Offline
Points: 1697
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote slackerr26 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 January 2010 at 11:32pm
^is a spending freeze not better than rampantly spending insane amounts of money with no limits whatsoever for the next ten years?
Back to Top
__sneaky__ View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Voted 2010 Most Improved Forumer

Joined: 14 January 2006
Location: Uncertain
Status: Offline
Points: 5286
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote __sneaky__ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 January 2010 at 11:34pm
When you go to make budget cuts... NEVER cut your investments in knowledge and your future.
"I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl


Forum Vice President
Back to Top
Darur View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Stare directly into my avatar...

Joined: 03 May 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9174
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Darur Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 January 2010 at 11:41pm
Originally posted by __sneaky__ __sneaky__ wrote:

When you go to make budget cuts... NEVER cut your investments in knowledge and your future.

Amen

This is a very depressing thing to hear
Real Men play Tuba

PH33R TEH 1337 Dwarf!
DONT CLICK ME!!1
Back to Top
Rp Fr View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
This title is just way too old

Joined: 20 May 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1091
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote  Rp Fr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 12:27am
Originally posted by Darur Darur wrote:

Originally posted by __sneaky__ __sneaky__ wrote:

When you go to make budget cuts... NEVER cut your investments in knowledge and your future.

Amen

This is a very depressing thing to hear


Truth. This earth isn't going to support us forever.
Back to Top
Eville View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - 5/19, Filter-dodge

Joined: 19 September 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3147
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 12:51am
It wil support us for the next couple of decades when we might actually have the tech to travel to other life supporting planets. 

Tallen:  I am ignoring your post.  On purpose.  Because it is a good point.  Which means it does not exist.  /youknowwho
Back to Top
__sneaky__ View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Voted 2010 Most Improved Forumer

Joined: 14 January 2006
Location: Uncertain
Status: Offline
Points: 5286
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote __sneaky__ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 1:10am
World population is expected to double in the next 40 years. At that point, it could easily be a little too late to start working on it. Let's face it, the first attempts will be very small, purely scientific facilities. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think we really have that much time to procrastinate.
"I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl


Forum Vice President
Back to Top
Eville View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - 5/19, Filter-dodge

Joined: 19 September 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3147
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 1:39am
Wrong.  the poorer areas of the world do not have that much time to procrastinate.  Which is good because that means we will be sending less aid to them.  Which means fewer instances of Dutch Disease which is, in the long run, very beneficial to the inhabitants of the poorer nations.  which means by cutting moon bases from the budget, Obama has saved the world.  BAM!...
Back to Top
tallen702 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Swearing on Facebook

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Under Your Bed
Status: Offline
Points: 10951
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tallen702 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 2:06am
Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

Wrong. the poorer areas of the world do not have that much time to procrastinate. Which is good because that means we will be sending less aid to them. Which means fewer instances of Dutch Disease which is, in the long run, very beneficial to the inhabitants of the poorer nations. which means by cutting moon bases from the budget, Obama has saved the world. BAM!...


I don't think that theory is nearly as sound on paper as it is in your head.

Besides, Dutch Disease is a dicey-at-best theory which chooses to ignore the complications of the current global economy. It may have been an excellent model for post-colonial Europe, but it simply doesn't pan out when applied to the modern world.

I wrote a letter to President Obama today and will be mailing it out tomorrow. I doubt he'll actually ever see it, but I felt it was important to do on the off chance that it might actually make it to his desk.

One of the points that I wrote that you really don't see a lot is that with the planet experiencing drastic climate change, it is all the more important to spread out our assets in an interstellar sense. If all hell does break loose in the next century or so with the climate, it would be beneficial to have colonies on the moon, Mars, or even the moons of Jupiter which, in the event of a global disaster on earth, could come to our aid. Think of it, if an apocalyptic disaster occurred right now, we would be sent back to the dark ages, or even worse, to prehistoric levels of technology and knowledge. With an outside safe-haven where all of our knowledge to date could be retained by people, it would be possible to re-organize, re-educate, and re-build. The world in a post-apocalyptic situation without such a repository of living knowledge would probably resemble something on the level of "By The Waters Of Babylon" or "A Boy And His Dog" in the barbaric and technologically devolved senses.

We have come to a point as a species where we will no longer evolve on our own planet. Evolution ends when a species stops adapting to their environment and starts adapting their environment to themselves. We are beginning to lack biodiversity as a species and one day before too much longer, all sense of biodiversity as a species will be gone for good. All it will take is one good epidemic to wipe us out. It should be our priority as a species, for the survival of our species, to branch out to off-world colonies in an attempt to provide for our very own futures. Unless we get off-world, and soon, we're going to go the way of the dodo and quite a bit more quickly than we think. We've dodged a lot of bullets as a species, it's only a matter of time before we don't.

Edited by tallen702 - 28 January 2010 at 2:08am
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>
Back to Top
Eville View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - 5/19, Filter-dodge

Joined: 19 September 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3147
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 2:23am
Tallen, did you post something there?  All I see is empty spaceCool
Back to Top
The Guy View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Soup Can Guy

Joined: 18 March 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 6664
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Guy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 2:29am
So does this mean that NASA is run by robots that are fueled by burning money?

Or did that $79mil get sent to the workers and material companies that built and an everything?
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 7:26am
Let me post this again, since you guys clearly missed what the article says... I will highlight to help you catch it this time.
 
Originally posted by FreeEnterprise FreeEnterprise wrote:

 
 
Uh, Oh...
 
Your precious is going to ax the moon mission... So they can focus on global warming...
 
 
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
 
 
"NASA's plans to return astronauts to the moon are dead. So are the rockets being designed to take them there that is, if President Barack Obama gets his way.

When the White House releases his budget proposal Monday, there will be no money for the Constellation program that was supposed to return humans to the moon by 2020. The troubled and expensive Ares I rocket that was to replace the space shuttle to ferry humans to space will be gone, along with money for its bigger brother, the Ares V cargo rocket that was to launch the fuel and supplies needed to take humans back to the moon.

There will be no lunar landers, no moon bases, no Constellation program at all.

In their place, according to White House insiders, agency officials, industry executives and congressional sources familiar with Obama's long-awaited plans for the space agency, NASA will look at developing a new "heavy-lift" rocket that one day will take humans and robots to explore beyond low Earth orbit. But that day will be years possibly even a decade or more away.

In the meantime, the White House will direct NASA to concentrate on Earth-science projects principally, researching and monitoring climate change and on a new technology research and development program that will one day make human exploration of asteroids and the inner solar system possible."
 
 
 
See, you guys "see" reductions in spending. But, that is not what this says. It just changes the focus to longer range space goals, and a focus of NASA money on climate change. His budget for 2010 INCREASED spending at NASA. His proposed freeze is a scam and not until 2011... using the INCREASED figures that will be frozen.
 
Here let me give you a big 20% raise, and then next year I will "freeze" that raise so you can keep it... But, don't worry the public is too stupid to realize that I just gave a raise during a "depression"...
 
 
This is not a reduction of money, just moving it around. This administration is great at building up slush funds to use for their interests... Like the "stimulus" plan, yeah, that helped business... (well, it did help unions... and they work for business so it did help them, but that is BIG business, not main street)
 
 
 
After that speech last night I would think you guys would catch on. He doesn't care what you think. He is in this for his agenda. Which is for a larger government, with control over business.
 
He gains said control over business by controlling health care and cap and tax, and massive new regulations.
 
 
That speech puts the final nails in the coffin of the democratic party. And our economy, as we will now enter stage 2... The double dip recession, starting now.
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
WGP guy2 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
I play the Bag Pipes

Joined: 23 September 2005
Location: 17h 45m 40.04s
Status: Offline
Points: 2585
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote WGP guy2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 9:40am
You have to love the lawyers telling the engineers how to do their job.  Dead

Edited by WGP guy2 - 28 January 2010 at 9:40am
Back to Top
__sneaky__ View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Voted 2010 Most Improved Forumer

Joined: 14 January 2006
Location: Uncertain
Status: Offline
Points: 5286
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote __sneaky__ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 9:43am
Pro tip: As germany learned, don't piss off your physicists. We build your nukes. ;)
"I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl


Forum Vice President
Back to Top
WGP guy2 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
I play the Bag Pipes

Joined: 23 September 2005
Location: 17h 45m 40.04s
Status: Offline
Points: 2585
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote WGP guy2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 9:51am
Rumors are now that they are planning to go with the DIRECT 3.0 plan.

It uses existing technology from the shuttle launch system.  Not necessarily a bad thing but it is more of a 'meantime' plan IMO.  I still they they should continue with Constellation, perhaps at a slower rate, while they utilize the DIRECT plan.  There was already a lot of money and time put into it to stop now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIRECT

Quite a few of the internships I applied for were working on the Constellation program.  None have been canceled so far; I guess we'll find out on Monday.


Originally posted by __sneaky__ __sneaky__ wrote:

Pro tip: As germany learned, don't piss off your physicists. We build your nukes. ;)


Along those lines, if they US doesn't want the Constellation program, maybe LM & Boeing can find a country that does.  Angry


Edited by WGP guy2 - 28 January 2010 at 9:53am
Back to Top
tallen702 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Swearing on Facebook

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Under Your Bed
Status: Offline
Points: 10951
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tallen702 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 10:33am
Originally posted by WGP guy2 WGP guy2 wrote:


Along those lines, if they US doesn't want the Constellation program, maybe LM & Boeing can find a country that does.


I hear the PRC might be interested in putting things in space....

Edit:

And WGP, while I like the fact that DIRECT makes use of current technology to fuel the missions, I don't like the fact that it is shuttle derived. I'd much rather see us go back to the Saturn V platform (albeit an expanded and improved version allowing for more thrust and thus, more direct lunar routes) than continue to use the booster-driven configuration that the DIRECT system envisions.

And FE, a freeze after a raise is still a freeze. We should be pumping money into NASA to not only create new jobs for highly skilled individuals, but to open up opportunities to secure our economy in the future with off-world production of materials, fuel, and resources.

Edited by tallen702 - 28 January 2010 at 10:39am
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>
Back to Top
ParielIsBack View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
future target of fratricide

Joined: 13 October 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ParielIsBack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 10:53am
What other country could afford it?

WGP covered most of my major problems with NASA.  Great, they got to the moon -- with a gigantic budget and the loss of three astronaut's lives.  They've shown a disregard for the dangers of operating on the cutting edge of technology, and it's cost them two shuttles and 14 astronauts, not to mention a couple of Mars missions.  I believe that the lack of economic pressure to produce cost-effective, safe technology, as well as the political  importance of sticking to launch schedules has hurt NASA to the point where they can no longer perform effectively.  I think the Constellation program shows promise, and at this point we should use it given the investment so far.  But I think drastic changes should be made in the way NASA is financed and run.
BU Engineering 2012
Back to Top
Eville View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - 5/19, Filter-dodge

Joined: 19 September 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3147
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 12:48pm
Thoughts on space cannons?
Back to Top
WGP guy2 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
I play the Bag Pipes

Joined: 23 September 2005
Location: 17h 45m 40.04s
Status: Offline
Points: 2585
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote WGP guy2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 12:55pm
Originally posted by tallen702 tallen702 wrote:

Originally posted by WGP guy2 WGP guy2 wrote:


Along those lines, if they US doesn't want the Constellation program, maybe LM & Boeing can find a country that does.

And WGP, while I like the fact that DIRECT makes use of current technology to fuel the missions, I don't like the fact that it is shuttle derived. I'd much rather see us go back to the Saturn V platform (albeit an expanded and improved version allowing for more thrust and thus, more direct lunar routes) than continue to use the booster-driven configuration that the DIRECT system envisions.


This was devised by almost exclusively engineers in their free time.  They weren't doing it for anyone or being payed to do it.  I'm going to assume they know what their doing, and that they surely have a reason for the technology they use.
Back to Top
WGP guy2 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
I play the Bag Pipes

Joined: 23 September 2005
Location: 17h 45m 40.04s
Status: Offline
Points: 2585
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote WGP guy2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 January 2010 at 1:03pm
Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

Thoughts on space cannons?


Perhaps you didn't see the part about 5000 Gs?  Unless you want to launch a bunch of rocks into space...

Also, it would be traveling at Mach 17 (over 3 times the minimum mach to be called 'hypersonic') when it reached the end of launch mechanism.  Assuming the shortwaves didn't damage the system, the heat probably would.

Drag force increases proportional to velocity squared, so accelerating the payload to Mach 17 at sea level would be extraordinarily inefficient.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 10111213>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.215 seconds.