Tweet
From someone who doesn't even know their 2p orbitals...
-
-
-
Just by building the rocket in 2005 and not 1970 they have to use lots of new technologies. Also consider a factor of 10 in price and of 100* in personnel size.Originally posted by Az
and the comparison is fair, because they're trying wholly new technology. :beer:
So yes, it's a pretty fair comparison.
(* - I pulled this number straight out of my ass
)
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master" - Commissioner Pravin Lal.Comment
-
Just by building the rocket in 2005 and not 1970 they have to use lots of new technologies.
this is great
Comment
-
Yeah, Eli...that was weak. I think a better comment is that the field still has much the same issues that it has had for years since development has been slow and space usage has not exploded. So, the failure of this venture is not a huge indictment of the management. The technology really is still tricky. And I expect that every new design and venture ends up with some relearning of old lessons. It's still a young field.
That said...it was a failure...and some blame for the management should attach.Comment
-
OK. I also talked about an 80% success rate, not the 50% government projects had, which makes it even more difficult,"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master" - Commissioner Pravin Lal.Comment
-
Selective, no? Why not just the first ten of each?A friend of mine wrote to remind me that only 5 of the first 9 Pegasus launches succeeded; 3 of 5 for Ariane; 9 of 20 for Atlas; 9 of 21 for Soyuz; and 9 of 18 for Proton.Comment
-
It would also be interesting to see how success changed over time.Comment
-
AO OA. Who said the venture had failed? The launch failed, but the business case is still likely to close successfully.So, the failure of this venture is not a huge indictment of the management.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Tech development in rocketry is an interesting subject. One thing to note is that since rocketry is tricky, rocket designers are conservative to the extreme about introducing new technologies. If something was proven to work in the 1950s, then you use it in 2006.Originally posted by TCO
Yeah, Eli...that was weak. I think a better comment is that the field still has much the same issues that it has had for years since development has been slow and space usage has not exploded. So, the failure of this venture is not a huge indictment of the management. The technology really is still tricky. And I expect that every new design and venture ends up with some relearning of old lessons. It's still a young field.
That said...it was a failure...and some blame for the management should attach.
Unfortunately, that puts you into a pattern of doing things the way they have always been done rather than a pattern of constant improvement.
Because of this, Eli's argument isn't weak. This rocket was a clean sheet design. It uses a lot of proven technologies that haven't been used on rockets before. Simple stuff like using ethernet. Other rockets use analog communications with huge wires running the length of the rocket. I guess the Russians are still using cutting edge Soviet 1950s technology. Really primitive stuff!Last edited by DanS; March 26, 2006, 12:39.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
If you take away the teething problems of the 1950s, then there has been no progress on success. I guess this shouldn't surprise us, considering that the technology used is roughly the same through the decades.Originally posted by TCO
It would also be interesting to see how success changed over time.
Code:TOTALS BY DECADE L = Launches F = Failures L(F) Success Rate ---------------------------- 1950s 48(27) 0.44 1960s 991(68) 0.93 1970s 1231(84) 0.93 1980s 1194(55) 0.95 1990s 892(64) 0.93 2000-05 381(17) 0.96 ---------------------------- TOTAL 4737(415) 0.91
There have been 2 failures in 2006, so the '00s are no better than the rest.Last edited by DanS; March 26, 2006, 12:50.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Originally posted by DanS
Ah ****, vehicle lost!
Score!
Rethink Refuse Reduce Reuse
Do It OurselvesComment
-
Sure, you can launch from anywhere. But to send something into equaltorial orbit from Vandenberg, you have to launch over landOriginally posted by DanS
You can launch most payloads from either of the two ranges.
and, shooting north from Canaveral requires launching over southern states and south requires launching over Carribean islands. If your rocket fails to launch correctly, you want it to hit water, not people.
Comment
-
Errr... Launching north from Cape Canaveral doesn't put you over southern states. Rather, it flies over ocean. The first hazard zone of any import is Canada's Hibernia offshore oil fields. Launching from Cape Canaveral into an equatorial orbit doesn't put you over land until Africa.
It really depends on the mission needs.Last edited by DanS; March 26, 2006, 14:24.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Why is it so hard to launch a rocket???
Germans were doing it way back in 1940s with success, it's 60 years later and they are just as unstable as ever.
Is it because the fuel?? (heat and being unstable)We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. - Abraham LincolnComment
Comment