<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Swooping in on NASA</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:12:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: SionH</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220779</link>
		<dc:creator>SionH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 09:17:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220779</guid>
		<description>Once I&#039;m president, you&#039;ll all become British again and have to learn the metric system. Muah ha ha ha!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Once I&#8217;m president, you&#8217;ll all become British again and have to learn the metric system. Muah ha ha ha!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ferris Valyn</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220778</link>
		<dc:creator>Ferris Valyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 05:08:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220778</guid>
		<description>Ellindsey - you asked about the test being a sham - let me cover the major points

First, its important to understand what the Ares I rocket is (and isn&#039;t)

Ares I consists (from the top down) consists of, at the top, the launch abort system (the long pointy thing at the top).  Below that is the Orion Capsule/Service Module.  Under that is the 2nd stage, which uses what is called a J-2X engine.  Below that the 1st stage, which consists of a 5 segment rocket, based on the 4 segment Solid Rocket Booster on the shuttle (the 2 things on the side of the shuttle, when it launches), although the propellant grain and burn is different.  Also, if memory serves me correctly, the guidance systems that were planned for Ares I are still under discussion, and might be largely handled by the Orion spacecraft.

The Ares I-X rocket consisted of a mass simulator of the LAS &amp; Orion Spacecraft, a Mass simulator of the 2nd stage, a mass simulator of a single segment of the SRB, and a modified 4 segment shuttle SRB.  In addition, the guidance system was a modified Atlas V guidance system.

In other words, the top was different, the 2nd stage was different, the first stage was different, and the guidance system was different.  Now, I have no problem doing test flights - I think they are great things, and its important to remember they are tests.  But, for test flights to be valuable, they need to test the actual flight hardware</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ellindsey &#8211; you asked about the test being a sham &#8211; let me cover the major points</p>
<p>First, its important to understand what the Ares I rocket is (and isn&#8217;t)</p>
<p>Ares I consists (from the top down) consists of, at the top, the launch abort system (the long pointy thing at the top).  Below that is the Orion Capsule/Service Module.  Under that is the 2nd stage, which uses what is called a J-2X engine.  Below that the 1st stage, which consists of a 5 segment rocket, based on the 4 segment Solid Rocket Booster on the shuttle (the 2 things on the side of the shuttle, when it launches), although the propellant grain and burn is different.  Also, if memory serves me correctly, the guidance systems that were planned for Ares I are still under discussion, and might be largely handled by the Orion spacecraft.</p>
<p>The Ares I-X rocket consisted of a mass simulator of the LAS &amp; Orion Spacecraft, a Mass simulator of the 2nd stage, a mass simulator of a single segment of the SRB, and a modified 4 segment shuttle SRB.  In addition, the guidance system was a modified Atlas V guidance system.</p>
<p>In other words, the top was different, the 2nd stage was different, the first stage was different, and the guidance system was different.  Now, I have no problem doing test flights &#8211; I think they are great things, and its important to remember they are tests.  But, for test flights to be valuable, they need to test the actual flight hardware</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Ansorge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220777</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Ansorge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220777</guid>
		<description>17.   Ellindsey

The first computer I worked on was the Univac 1108(1969), which was sold as a third generation machine [1)tubes,2) transistors,3) integrated circuits] though it was really only generation 2.5. Most of that computer was transistors, resistors, capacitors, inductors. Only the registers (with 177 base 8 addresses) were integrated circuits.

The military had, at the same time, the YUK 7(a mil-spec, hardened Univac 1108), which, as I recall, used all integrated circuits and was 1/10th the physical size of the Univac 1108.

I&#039;m pretty sure the onboard computers on Apollo were similar to the U 1108, a mix of solid state and integrated circuits.

Russian satellites used tubes in those days, which proved much more reliable than solid state devices in hard vacuum, since vacuum evaporation of printed circuits and redeposition of conductive thin films was a real problem. We eventually solved that problem and now integrated circuits are much more reliable than vacuum tubes in the same environment.

GAry 7</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>17.   Ellindsey</p>
<p>The first computer I worked on was the Univac 1108(1969), which was sold as a third generation machine [1)tubes,2) transistors,3) integrated circuits] though it was really only generation 2.5. Most of that computer was transistors, resistors, capacitors, inductors. Only the registers (with 177 base 8 addresses) were integrated circuits.</p>
<p>The military had, at the same time, the YUK 7(a mil-spec, hardened Univac 1108), which, as I recall, used all integrated circuits and was 1/10th the physical size of the Univac 1108.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m pretty sure the onboard computers on Apollo were similar to the U 1108, a mix of solid state and integrated circuits.</p>
<p>Russian satellites used tubes in those days, which proved much more reliable than solid state devices in hard vacuum, since vacuum evaporation of printed circuits and redeposition of conductive thin films was a real problem. We eventually solved that problem and now integrated circuits are much more reliable than vacuum tubes in the same environment.</p>
<p>GAry 7</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ellindsey</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220776</link>
		<dc:creator>Ellindsey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 15:23:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220776</guid>
		<description>Apollo gwasn&#039;t vacuum tube technology, an Apollo guidance computer using vacuum tubes would have been far too heavy.  It used some of the first mass-produced integrated circuits in existence, as well as a lot of transistors.  I don&#039;t actually know of any tubes used anywhere in the Apollo craft itself.

I&#039;m curious if Phil has any more information on what he said about the Ares I-X launch being basically a sham.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apollo gwasn&#8217;t vacuum tube technology, an Apollo guidance computer using vacuum tubes would have been far too heavy.  It used some of the first mass-produced integrated circuits in existence, as well as a lot of transistors.  I don&#8217;t actually know of any tubes used anywhere in the Apollo craft itself.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m curious if Phil has any more information on what he said about the Ares I-X launch being basically a sham.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MadScientist</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220775</link>
		<dc:creator>MadScientist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:09:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220775</guid>
		<description>@SLC:  Humans in space has always been about a joy ride (but some science was achieved).  Many rocketry people like Bob Goddard and Werner Von Braun were inspired chiefly by the thought of exploration.  The same is true today; science is secondary.  Whether or not it is the fiscally or ethically responsible thing to do is not so important to these people.  There are many people who would risk being killed in a launch catastrophe for the opportunity to go where no one else has been before.  I believe money is better spent on remote controlled missions, but I wouldn&#039;t pee in the human space travel pool - I think the travel would be pretty awesome even if not really useful.  However, unlike most rocketry people I would be more keen on developing technologies and techniques for sustaining life on a long trip (or in a remote area like the moon) - for me, those basic problems must be solved before going all gaga and flying in every direction.  I wouldn&#039;t want to be the first human corpse on Mars (not that I&#039;d be accepted in any space program anymore).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@SLC:  Humans in space has always been about a joy ride (but some science was achieved).  Many rocketry people like Bob Goddard and Werner Von Braun were inspired chiefly by the thought of exploration.  The same is true today; science is secondary.  Whether or not it is the fiscally or ethically responsible thing to do is not so important to these people.  There are many people who would risk being killed in a launch catastrophe for the opportunity to go where no one else has been before.  I believe money is better spent on remote controlled missions, but I wouldn&#8217;t pee in the human space travel pool &#8211; I think the travel would be pretty awesome even if not really useful.  However, unlike most rocketry people I would be more keen on developing technologies and techniques for sustaining life on a long trip (or in a remote area like the moon) &#8211; for me, those basic problems must be solved before going all gaga and flying in every direction.  I wouldn&#8217;t want to be the first human corpse on Mars (not that I&#8217;d be accepted in any space program anymore).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: amphiox</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220774</link>
		<dc:creator>amphiox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 01:28:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220774</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t see any point in the U.S. returning to the moon right now, not until we have the tech and economic wherewithal to set up a permanently inhabited colony and send at least 100 people at a time, at least once a year. Since it will certainly take some time before we have the capability to do this, trying to go back now is just a waste of resources replicating stuff we&#039;ve already done before.

The exploration part of the manned space program should focus on direct trips to Mars and maybe a landing or orbit of a near-earth asteroid. (Doing this will also help us get a lot closer to doing the moon colony.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t see any point in the U.S. returning to the moon right now, not until we have the tech and economic wherewithal to set up a permanently inhabited colony and send at least 100 people at a time, at least once a year. Since it will certainly take some time before we have the capability to do this, trying to go back now is just a waste of resources replicating stuff we&#8217;ve already done before.</p>
<p>The exploration part of the manned space program should focus on direct trips to Mars and maybe a landing or orbit of a near-earth asteroid. (Doing this will also help us get a lot closer to doing the moon colony.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Davidlpf</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220773</link>
		<dc:creator>Davidlpf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 01:15:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220773</guid>
		<description>Why can we not go to the moon and send a robot to Europa. The budget for  NASA is less then one percent of the current budget so the argument that cutting the budget to the man space program will affect the budget is kind of silly. The only reason we are not on the moon and maybe Mars now is because of politics not technology. It is a testament to humans in general that we have been space and to the moon. Eventually, hopefully we will have feet on the ice on Europa. Maybe for the space Olympics.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why can we not go to the moon and send a robot to Europa. The budget for  NASA is less then one percent of the current budget so the argument that cutting the budget to the man space program will affect the budget is kind of silly. The only reason we are not on the moon and maybe Mars now is because of politics not technology. It is a testament to humans in general that we have been space and to the moon. Eventually, hopefully we will have feet on the ice on Europa. Maybe for the space Olympics.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SLC</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220772</link>
		<dc:creator>SLC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:52:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220772</guid>
		<description>Re Phil Plait @ #7 &amp; Torbjörn Larsson @ #4

1.  Prof. Park has addressed the issue of a Chinese expedition on to the moon his web site and his response is &quot;yawn&quot;.

2.  The argument for human space flight  seems to come down to a spirit of adventure and exploration, much like Columbus, Magellan, and their contemporaries.  That&#039;s all well and good, but in these times of massive budget deficits, this is an adventure that we can&#039;t afford, particularly as it will detract from scientific discovery from robotic missions which will have to survive on short rations.

However, let me state the case this way.  Returning to the moon with astronauts is a big so what.  We did it 40 years ago with far inferior technology.  I think that a far more exciting discovery is potentially within reach with present technology, namely the possibility of life in the oceans of Europa.  Imagine a robotic mission to Europa in which a TV camera or other such device is lowered into one of the vents in the ice sheet and discovers a shark (or other living creature) swimming around in the Europaen ocean.  That would, IMHO, be the greatest discovery in the history of the human race.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re Phil Plait @ #7 &amp; Torbjörn Larsson @ #4</p>
<p>1.  Prof. Park has addressed the issue of a Chinese expedition on to the moon his web site and his response is &#8220;yawn&#8221;.</p>
<p>2.  The argument for human space flight  seems to come down to a spirit of adventure and exploration, much like Columbus, Magellan, and their contemporaries.  That&#8217;s all well and good, but in these times of massive budget deficits, this is an adventure that we can&#8217;t afford, particularly as it will detract from scientific discovery from robotic missions which will have to survive on short rations.</p>
<p>However, let me state the case this way.  Returning to the moon with astronauts is a big so what.  We did it 40 years ago with far inferior technology.  I think that a far more exciting discovery is potentially within reach with present technology, namely the possibility of life in the oceans of Europa.  Imagine a robotic mission to Europa in which a TV camera or other such device is lowered into one of the vents in the ice sheet and discovers a shark (or other living creature) swimming around in the Europaen ocean.  That would, IMHO, be the greatest discovery in the history of the human race.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Davidlpf</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220771</link>
		<dc:creator>Davidlpf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:36:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220771</guid>
		<description>You wrote a book?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You wrote a book?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Davidlpf</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/12/swooping-in-on-nasa/#comment-220770</link>
		<dc:creator>Davidlpf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:35:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=11493#comment-220770</guid>
		<description>If you click my name it will take you to clavius a great resource on the moon landing, It will point out simple integrated circuits were available in the sixties.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you click my name it will take you to clavius a great resource on the moon landing, It will point out simple integrated circuits were available in the sixties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: basic

Served from: blogs.discovermagazine.com @ 2013-06-17 23:54:05 -->