Re: OT: A bit of a long shot, but
- From: John Larkin <jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 12:11:55 -0700
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 20:52:43 +0200, martin griffith
<mart_in_medina@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 10:49:05 -0700, in sci.electronics.design John
Larkin <jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:59:07 +0200, martin griffith
<mart_in_medina@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Nice pic here, of the ISS white elephant
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070628.html
and it was taken from the ground
martin
I wonder how many hundred billion dollars more, and how many more
lives, we will lose before we abandon that idiotic idea. Return on
investment so far has been zero.
John
Indirect gains may have occured, like the ability to service the
Hubble telescope, which has been a great benefit to astronomical
science.
One Hubble repair mission costs more than launching another space
telescope, or 10 times more than building a ground-based
adaptive-optics telescope of superior resolution. So we have one
ailing Hubble when we could have launched a new one every year and
done several times as much science, without killing crews.
NASA's unmanned science missions have been spectacular and economical;
the men-in-space stuff has been insanely expensive, deadly, and
absolutely useless.
John
.
- References:
- OT: A bit of a long shot, but
- From: martin griffith
- Re: OT: A bit of a long shot, but
- From: John Larkin
- Re: OT: A bit of a long shot, but
- From: martin griffith
- OT: A bit of a long shot, but
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: A bit of a long shot, but
- Next by Date: Re: ethernet chips
- Previous by thread: Re: OT: A bit of a long shot, but
- Next by thread: Re: OT: A bit of a long shot, but
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
