 | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) Tomorrow's the scheduled launch day for the first suborbital flight (this apparently is not an X Prize qualifying flight, needs 3 people on board to be the first of the pair required, but predictions are that if this goes well, the prize will (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | (...) My understanding is that to win he'll have to make two flights within a two week period; each of which must carry the weight of three people. The prize runs out at the end of this year, so Mr Melvill may well be the first of a handful making (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) Whoo-hoo! I just watched spaceshipone land and the first civilian astronaut in the history of mankind walk into the history books. What an exciting day! Chris (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | "Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:Hznzvx.5DF@lugnet.com... (...) astronaut in (...) Hmm, I might dispute the first civilian astronaut bit. Dennis Tito would qualify for that in my book. Well, actually, before that (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | (...) Tito wasn't an astronaut (or, technically, in his case, a cosmonaut). He was sentient ballast. An astronaut is defined as a pilot or crew member on a space flight, not a tourist. (...) If she would have qualified (I'm not sure if she reached (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) Rutan says he's going for orbit once this step is perfected. I don't think that a ten year timeline for that is at all aggressive considering what the last ten years have provided. (...) Yeah, those will be better. And then there are better (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | (...) What else could he say? To go into orbit he'll need a quantum leap in technology and funding. Perhaps the North Koreans could help with funding? ;) Being cynical, I'd say SpaceShipOne is nothing more than another way for the wealthy to waste (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) NASA was sorta forced into cheating on that one. The Russians got the jump on them, so they had to bypass the X-15 suborbital jet plane by outfitting nuclear missiles with crew modules instead of warheads. The ironic thing was that the X-15 (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | (...) It's valid to ask whether this is scalable technology or not but if one isn't impressed by this, one is part of the problem, in my view. It's not the technology per se that's the impressive part, although that's certainly cool, it's that (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) That's absolute nonsense. My impression or lack thereof has no direct impact on this venture, as I don't have the money to throw at it either as an investor or as a customer. I could be the most excited person in the world and it wouldn't (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) You're entitled to your viewpoint, even if expressed not very politely, but I have a different view. As for your second para, do some research into how NASA, the FAA, and the OCST have held things back. It's not lack of desire or lack of (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) What tooling have they destroyed? The shuttle cargo thing was bad because of the very thing that happened: JPL knew that any problem (as in loss of crew) meant long delays that could be avoided by using non-crewed launch vehicles. And there (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) All of the Saturn tooling is no more. NASA admitted they did that on purpose to "focus efforts on the shuttle". Arguably the Saturns would have been really great Big Dumb Boosters if heavy lift was something that NASA was really interested in. (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —J. Spencer Rezkalla
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Well of course they did. Is there any reason to spend money to preserve and maintain the tooling viability for a rocket that can no longer be launched? All the existing Saturn launch infrastructure was modified for shuttle use. The launch (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) (I should have said 'and infrastructure') (...) Nope. But if you get rid of one element then it becomes easier to justify getting rid of the rest. The tooling was just the last thing to go in a whole sorry parade of wanton waste and (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) This whole tooling issue reminds me about the destruction of the early Lego moulds. (...) If they had kept this stuff, I expect their critics would have harangued them for wasting tax payer’s money maintaining and storing obsolete equipment. (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —J. Spencer Rezkalla
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Did it? Wasn't it Congress who wasn't too keen on buying more Saturns and cut the remaining moon missions and all the cool future Apollo applications projects that NASA DID want. The shuttle was then sold as a way to get more bang-for-the-buck (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) True. But it's difficult if not impossible to divorce NASA and Congress. NASA does what Congress tells it to do. (...) You're sort of trying to put words in my mouth here and I have to correct you, I'm afraid... No, the point is why (in 1969) (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —J. Spencer Rezkalla
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Probably. But how many major aerospace endeavors come off exactly like they sound on paper? Hindsight is always 20/20. I certainly wouldn't call the shuttle program a huge mistake. Sure, it didn't deliver the promised goods, but I believe the (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Me either. At least not the idea of it, and the time was about right, or if anything. My issues are with the execution of it. Too many compromises for it to achieve the promised cost reductions that would have driven vastly greater usage.. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Saturn V rockets would have, admittedly, had a lower cost per payload pound, but who would have been able to take advantage of that capacity besides the government? Commercial enterprise needs greater cost efficiency, not greater capacity. (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Costs money to store - does Ford still have the tooling for the Model T? And let me express at least some skepticism regarding the alleged motivation you attribute to NASA. -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) (URL) This> is interesting. "The Saturn 5 was also not cheap to operate... the launch cost of a single Saturn 5 at $431 million in 1967, or over $2.4 billion a launch in 2004 dollars... ...It’s not inconceivable that a new heavy-lift vehicle (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Yes, exactly! What's the point of developing a single-capacity heavy-launch system that's so prohibitively expensive as to restrict the range of customers to just Washington D.C.? I love the concept of strapping three D4's together to get a (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) S'funny...I've often thought much the same thing about you. BTW, did you ever track down your answer on using the (R) symbol when typing "The LEGO Company"? (...) Lessee, from what I've read, the OCST was formed as part of a bipartisan effort (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) If I understand things correctly, Rutan and Allen were working on this project either before the X-Prize happened or before they knew about it. The prize did not catalyze their involvement in space. Chris (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Not from what I understand. Rutan did start work before the X-Prize became fully-funded at $10 million, but he was inspired to get started by the X-Prize itself. He is reported to have started his program in 2001, but the X-Prize was founded (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | (...) With a completely new design, or with a modified version of this one? At the very least he'd need to add manouvering thrusters to make reentry possible. (...) Ten years to achieve what, exactly? Low orbit? High orbit? Moon-landings? Privately (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I'm reading between the lines, but I think only a little: new design, high orbit Yes, but let's imagine that Rutan can do it for $60M. What did NASA spend? (Of course, they were pioneering the technology!) (...) What if it's double those times (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) Is that for development or launch? (...) NASA is also a governmental agency, and therefore bound by red tape. In other words, they have to spend money to spend money. The government has been cited as spending $300 on a hammer, but the hammer (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) That's absolute nonsense. I could say more on this topic at this time but I'm not sure it's a good use of my time. (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) From page 112 of (URL) The Libertarian Playbook:> "Though technically not a valid rhetorical device, argument by assertion is commonly employed when attempting to dismiss an argument by fiat." (...) Also (URL) from page 112:> "One may attempt (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Personally, I like the spurious fake-quotation that raises (shouldn't that be "lowers"?) sophistry to a new level. ;-) -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I pride myself on my sophistrication. Dave! FUT ot.fun, because I'm having such a swell time! (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) So due to your lack of inclination to post a proper rebuttal, we're suppose to take the 'absolute nonsense' as the end of the arguement? "Hey Joe--you're an idiot!" "Wha--? Why???" "I don't have time nor the inclination to tell you, you're an (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) If this is such a monumental waste of your time, perhaps you'd prefer to get back to our discussion of whether or not tritium can be harnessed as an economic power source? I seem to remember a similar response when I pointed out that we'd need (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) The exact term you used, I think, wasn't it? (...) I don't recall ever making any such claim, I think you have me confused with someone else. However, if you can provide a cite where I said it, I'll gladly retract any statement I may have made (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Indeed it was, but you wholy missed the point in your zealous rush to criticize me yet again. I wasn't objecting to your use of my own words, but to your callous treatment of my statements by way of making a big public show of ignoring them. (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Sorry, I can't help notice, Dave, that you left off the end of Larry's message talking about baiting. Also, I'm not sure that anyone else cares who is right, you or him, other than the two of you. I've watched the two of you get into it on (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Tim, many thanks for your constructive input. ;) Dave, just how intelligent do you "claim" to be? ;) Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Top 0.5%, based on SAT scores. (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Wow. I can see why Tim feels intimidated by you! ;) Scott A (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) ROFL! -Tim (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I don't accept SAT as a valid indicator of intelligence even though there is a statistically powerful correlation for native English speakers. But I might just be missing part of an earlier conversation... Chris (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Out of curiosity, what are those? Pedro (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Hello, Pedro- (URL) Scholastic Aptitude Test> It is the standard test used by colleges for potential admissions. JOHN (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) During the first research methodology course in grad school, we were given data on the just-graduated University of Missouri students for an exercise in statistics. I found that SAT was the best predictor of college academic success for the (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Considering his history of bullying behavior towards me, here, on the MichLUG list, and especially by private e-mail (where his often inflammatory, usually hypocritical, and always condescending "suggestions" got to be of such a blatantly (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) This sounds familiar. Scott A (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) This sounds familiar. JOHN (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I heard a statistic indicating that the amount of energy needed to go into low orbit is about 70X the energy needed for this touching-the-face-of-God launch, so there are many difficulties to overcome, perhaps more daunting than the obstacles (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Richard Parsons
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) An interesting idea - a distinction that had never really occurred to me before. To me the government is just an expression Australian-ness, not at all unlike an Australian company is another expression, as are our (non-governmental) sporting (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) My sewerage system is completely privately owned and works just fine. Chris (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Disagree, see below. (...) I'd agree with that. Properly construed, government is a tool to protect rights. Improperly constructed, government is a master that takes them away. (...) Two points. 1, Perhaps there's a bit of cause and effect (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Sewerage systems tend to be monopolies. The only way to ensure treatment and conveyance standards are met is to regulate performance... the "market" is poor at protecting our environment. (...) You are cherry picking. I'm sure IBM and BATF (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Richard Parsons
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) As per my reply to Chris I wasn't actually saying that governments should run sewerage, only that government is critically important, like sewerage is critically important. (...) I think we've got a large area of agreement on this, looking at (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Serendipity & IBM —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Put your flag away. By chance, I read (URL) this> is my newspaper yesterday about IBM: Gypsies win right to sue IBM over role in Holocaust - In 1936 IBM set up its European "headquarters" in Geneva. The appeals court ruling said: "It does not (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) OK, thanks for clearing that up. I do hope you can see why we all misinterpreted your original wording though. (...) Neither. I think a government is *capable* of acting in ways that would make me feel patriotic, and in fact the US government (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) It is a minor point, but I thought he was succinct: "Don't get me wrong, government is critically important (like say, a decent sewerage system), but its highest achievement is to be just a tool." It was CW's response which shaped things. If (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Who makes sure of that; you or the government? Who tests WWTW discharges; you or the government? I assume your local sewerage operator runs a monopoly? Scott A (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) The type of sewerage handling systems that I may install are defined by building code. So I guess, the government. Discharge testing at the site (I'm running with septic) is done prior to accepting the design as legal. I'm actually not sure (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Have a look at (URL). (...) Very worthy. (...) I'm not surprised. I expect you select a contractor based on a mixture of price, connivance & personal recommendation. Everything else is based on trust. In the same way, most people just flush (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Cool! There's a lot of this kind of research and development coming out of Denmark. At least, much of the stuff I've previously found points back that way. Chris (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Richard Parsons
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) That's wonderful. The point (in case I was not abundantly clear) is not that governments should run sewerage systems, but that governments are important, like sewerage systems are important. Richard Still baldly going... (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Oops. My bad. I guess I didn't read what was written...and now it's spawned off a stray conversation. Oh well. Now I wonder if I should go back and disagree with your actually point. :-) Chris (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?) —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) <snip> (...) I've been busy building for the last couple weeks, but I've finally got a chance to come back and read through this mess again. Much as others missed the intent of your sewer comment, I think you missed the intent of my patriotism (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Manoeuvring thrusters are the least of his worries; he shall need a 6-7 fold increases in velocity... and then he'll have to think about re-entry. Scott A (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | (canceled) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Merely a stepping stone. (...) Well, knock me over with a feather. Somebody inside NASA is apparently considering whether NASA should give prizes too. Maybe nothing will come of it, maybe it was a misquote, who knows. But maybe??? (URL) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Yaay! (URL) Civilian pilot, civilian ship... Tito was a passenger on a government ship, so I'd say only quasi civilian. Cost for Tito's ride/stunt == cost for the entire Rutan SpaceShipOne program (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe? —J. Spencer Rezkalla
|
| | | | (...) Technically Tito wasn't the first paying passenger either, but I think he was the first to fund his own way. (...) True, but Tito got a week's vacation in a space Hilton. Today's flight was the equivalent of a couple of minute ride in the (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
