Posted on 11/24/2010 9:44:02 PM PST by NonZeroSum
A typical conversation over the last year at space blogs.
But what about Islamic Self-esteem?
A fine example of authorial omnipotence.
Near the end there is the suggestion by the Rational Babe that we should accumulate fuel in LEO with numerous small launches instead of the Irrational Giant Launch.
Query: Can this be justified in physical terms?
Try it!
Good luck with that. You have idiots at NASA now and all the Germans are dead now. NASA was good when the Germans ran it. Today it is a make work agency with teamsters and other scum. Forget it. The country is broke, totally corrupt and run by a muslim.
...so does she.
Very true! We did indeed ‘inherit’ more than one German scientist from Germany after WWII. Weren’t the Saturn rockets designed by a German?
The German-American, you mean ... Von Braun. No doubt a genius.
London ... and the Moon, in his own lifetime. I always thought it a curious judgement of God, if we may regard it as such.
I don’t understand your question.
Well, what does physics have to say about the question of one big launch versus lots of little ones? A simple thought experiment: Compare, in your mind, 10 launches carrying N/10 lbs. of fuel as payload versus 1 launch of N lbs. of fuel as payload. Suppose you strap the 10 smaller rockets together ( in thought ) and regard them as one launch. How are we doing here?
“Wuntz de roketz go up
Who cares vere dey komm down.
Dat’s not my department”
Sez Wernher Von Braun.
—Tom Lehrer
--- B.H.O., reminiscing about his youthful limousine chariot rides.
We should turn Mecca into a glow in the dark smoking moon crater for starters!
Poorly.
As the video points out, large vehicles need large facilities (for instance, if we had built Ares V, it would have required a new crawler and crawlway to get it to the pad), and large staff to operate them, and have no economies of operational scale. Every study ever done indicates that economics of scale for flight rate are much greater than those for vehicle size. In addition, you have no redundancy with a single large vehicle, whereas you could have multiple providers if you break the flight up into smaller pieces.
Go back and watch the video again. It explains all the reasons why heavy lift makes no economic sense.
Which section of the Constitution authorizes NASA? It should be shut down and its technology given to the air force.
I don't know, but that's a different subject. This is about how NASA should best send people beyond earth orbit, given that it's going to do so. Whether not is should is a separate topic.
It should be shut down and its technology given to the air force.
For what purpose? NASA has very little technology that would be useful to the Air Force. The Air Force already has its own space capabilities.
We don’t need to do all of apollo, only the last one
maybe 2, one for testing
What does that mean?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.