Anniversaries

[kallend 2,151]

99 years ago today the first powered airplane flight took place.

30 years ago yesterday a human walked on the Moon for the last time.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[quade 4]

Wanna take a look through the FutureCam(tm) (I got it back from Ari) and tell me when we're going back to the Moon?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Guest]

Quote

99 years ago today the first powered airplane flight took place.

30 years ago yesterday a human walked on the Moon for the last time.

Crap. I was gonna post the Wright Flyer anniversary earlier today, but I figgered nobody would notice.

Still amazes me - less than 66 years between the first powered manned flight and the first manned moon landing.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[PhreeZone 20]

Not for at least another 15 years. Budgets for all the way out to 2006 were tossed around not long ago and there are no plans for another manned mission in those. At a 4 year lead time to build a completely new space capusle with testing and training your looking at 2012 at the soonest and thats if they start in 2007 budget. The current Nasa chief has no intentions of doing a Mars program so its hard to imagine him agreeing to a Moon.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Chivo 0]

With all the computing power/electronics available today, is it really necessary to send a human being? Most of the samples needed for reaserch can be obtained using robots.

And if the research is about how humans react to no/low gravity, they can do it without going all the way to the moon.

~Chivo

[happythoughts 0]

"Most of the samples needed for reaserch can be obtained using robots. "

I think that was the plan with Mars, but there was a little bit of trouble comprehending the meters/yards difference. Rocket scientists may be smart, but I may need to re-evaluate an old analogy 'cause those guys weren't exactly rocket scientists either.

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

Most of the samples needed for reaserch can be obtained using robots

And a sufficient number of calories and vitamins can be had with a gastric tube placing nutrients directly into the stomach.

It's cheaper to do the robotic thing, and more effective for a lot of experiments. But, putting humans into the loop does two things:
1. gives the public someone to identify with (maybe I/my kids can go to space some day)
2. gives a much greater ability to react creatively when something unforseen happens. And something unforseen is GOING to happen.

[pontificate]Space systems are enormously complex; not just the machine, but the teamwork needed across multiple companies, divisions, organizations, and countries to pull them off.

Problems like the metric/English (or a single integer overflow problem on Ariane a few years back) are going to happen sometimes, especially if the system is too big for one organization to manage it, and for a couple of people to really understand it so they can talk it out. So instead you spend millions of dollars on verification, and people complain that you can't get it right in the first place.[/pontificate]

So -- didja guess I work for the space program???

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[blewaway5 0]

well, heck, why not just send a camera up with a rig and record the freefall, play it back on the tv and be happy rather than actually placing your life in danger? Humans just gotta adventure, even if it's a bit dangerous. That's usually when we learn the coolest stuff too

Truman Sparks for President

[Chivo 0]

Quote

...humans into the loop does two things:
1. gives the public someone to identify with (maybe I/my kids can go to space some day)
2. gives a much greater ability to react creatively when something unforseen happens. And something unforseen is GOING to happen.

True, but when that *unforseen* thing happens, it will not just jeopardize some equipment, it could (and probably will) jeopardize the ppl's lives too! Anyway, I agree that only humans have the problem solving skills needed when the sh*t hits the fan.

Quote

So -- didja guess I work for the space program???

Figures. Thx for the reply Wendy. What do you do there? Just curious.

~Chivo

[Chivo 0]

Quote

well, heck, why not just send a camera up with a rig and record the freefall, play it back on the tv and be happy rather than actually placing your life in danger? Humans just gotta adventure, even if it's a bit dangerous. That's usually when we learn the coolest stuff too

Hehehe! Never saw it this way... but then again... the astronauts would be the only ones having all the fun!

~Chivo

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

What do you do there? Just curious.

Program and support the (very old) programming on the shuttle's onboard computers. Specifically, the on-orbit systems management software -- payloads, vehicle monitoring, antennas, robot arm, etc.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[happythoughts 0]

"Humans just gotta adventure, even if it's a bit dangerous. "

Maybe we could use lawyers. There is so many of them and we wouldn't worry so much about their safety like we did the chimps.

[skr 1]

> (very old) programming on the shuttle's onboard computers

Nostalgia ..

I worked at JPL in the 60's in the trajectory analysis group.
We did the trajectories for the first moon, mars, venus and
other missions.

I wrote the midcourse maneuver program and some other
stuff. We did the whole thing in assembly language.

Skr

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

We did the whole thing in assembly language.

It was the only way to be really sure of what you were going to end up with.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[skr 1]

> It was the only way to be really sure of what you were going to end up with.

Ah, I hadn't thought of that.

I have always assumed without thinking about it
that we used assembly language because those
IBM 7094's only had 32K worth of 36 bit words
for main memory.

Every time we added / changed features for a new
mission we had to find room, delete this bit, rewrite
that bit, overlay another bit.

Every mission was a time of excitement and terrified
anticipation.

What if the parts that I wrote Don't Work!! ?? :-) :-)

Skr

[wmw999 2,589]

Skratch, you were there, and I wasn't. I have a feeling my reason is at most a distillation of yours. We still pay close attention to exactly what our computer will do with our specific code.

And we still worry about whether our part will work. But there's a lot more time in between writing and flying now.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Cajones 0]

I posted the Wright Brothers Anniversay on General Skydiving yesterday.

The laws of physics are strictly enforced.

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

I posted the Wright Brothers Anniversay on General Skydiving yesterday

Ahhhh....so here's a cookie for you...