http://gamingtrend.com
April 16, 2014, 05:19:08 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The future of NASA is... rockets  (Read 988 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
unbreakable
Guest
« on: September 22, 2005, 03:34:32 AM »

In an amazing echo of what scientsts said regarding NASA dumping their rocket program in favor of the Shuttle, NASA finally realizes the way to space is Rockets.

All those wasted billions, all those wasted decades.
Logged
Daehawk
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11756



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2005, 04:40:58 AM »

"...........in other news..Today NASA released this quote..............."

Logged

---------------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.

Check my trader rating. Im 22+ and zero negs. Trade with me! smile
Jancelot
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1349



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2005, 10:14:48 PM »

Quote
The U.S. space program is going back to the future for its proposed manned mission to the moon in 2018.

Instead of the familiar airplane-style shuttle the world has grown used to over the past 25 years, the spacecraft that NASA unveiled yesterday looks more like the Saturn V rockets that blasted an earlier generation of astronauts into orbit as part of the Apollo program.
Logged
Kev199
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 255


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2005, 11:28:13 PM »

I just can't wait to take the space elevator up to a gigantic space station where I can walk around and after an hour decide that space is pretty darn boring.  I'll then think about how I could have better spent the money on a vacation to Bermuda.  Of course the view of Earth would be pretty cool so I'd take a digital photo of it and then I'd set it as my background and avatar.  Everyone would be impressed by that!
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2005, 01:33:07 AM »

I think it's the martians.  They didnt want to see us in space, so they infiltrated NASA and made them kill what was, up to that point, a very successful space program.  Now those Martians have had decades to build up their invasion armada in the asteroid belt, and here we sit with no space ships.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71767


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2005, 03:27:18 AM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
I think it's the martians.  They didnt want to see us in space, so they infiltrated NASA and made them kill what was, up to that point, a very successful space program.  Now those Martians have had decades to build up their invasion armada in the asteroid belt, and here we sit with no space ships.



What a vivid imagination you have.  You should come to D.C. and share it with us....
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
Eco-Logic
Gaming Trend Member
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 2754


Gamertag: St0ckBroker


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2005, 02:01:03 PM »

Man I heard this story on NPR the other day and couldn't help but laugh.  

Why in the world is NASA going backward.

There are private companys that are far more innovative than NASA nowadays.
Logged

Go Gunners...
RedJak
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 263


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2005, 02:23:39 PM »

NASA Plan

I don't think this comes off as too huge of a step back.  If anything this should get them back on track toward a real plan while capitalizing on what they learned during the shuttle phase.  Perhaps the time has come for commercial outfits to start handling Low Earth Orbit stuff and get NASA back to doing the far reaching ideas.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2005, 08:47:46 AM »

Oh, quite the contrary.  Sorry if my post came off that way, but I personally don't view rockets as taking a step back.  In fact, after the second Shuttle explosion,  I went back to some old articles from scientists stating how the shuttle program would hurt NASA, and amazingly everything they said turned out 100% correct.

Their point still remains today- you get way more bang for the buck with rockets.  And at the time it was canned, NASA's rocket program was incredibly reliable.  Can you imagine how reliable rockets would be after decades of use, routine improvements, and new technologies?

Somebody here (I believe) posted a link about how all the info for NASA's rocket program just mysteriously got 'lost'.  Must have been the shuttle people, burning the boats after the troops land (metaphorically, of course).

I won't even get into how our current Shuttle program doesnt even come through on the concept it was created to serve.  In that respect, the X-Prize competitors are doing a far better job.
Logged
RedJak
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 263


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: September 24, 2005, 03:03:25 PM »

Heh. looks like I inserted a tone into your original post that just wasn't there (and maybe read too quickly).  

Looks like NASA is not screwing around with this Moon idea...link
Logged
ElijahPrice
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 826


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: September 25, 2005, 02:24:43 PM »

They got old and from the looks of it are managed for crap.  I worked with a lady at NASA Goddard for a little while, not with space exploration but on atmospheric research and some info on satellites and she just desccribed the whole organization as "a mess."

But the moon by 2018 is just kinda funny.  They are trying to re-invent the space race, or prove something again.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.089 seconds with 45 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.02s, 2q)