|
Post by smlbstcbr on Oct 4, 2008 21:59:20 GMT -4
But this is not a simple vehicle. It's more an utility wagon than a rover and, as mentioned in the other posts, the vehicle is being developed from scratch. Considering how expensive things are here, it's a real life budget. You are not taking into account a fact that kills an internal combustion engine to get to moon, at least concerning the vehicles for exploration: fuel. No matter if it's petroleum or argon, they have to be taken from earth. That would be extremely expensive. The very nice and simple electric motor would perform like a charm. Just needs a battery and a solar panel to get free energy from the sun, saving millions in transportation costs. EDIT: I forgot, an electric motor has a maximum torque at low RPMs, the Otto-cycle engine only delivers power at a very narrow band of RMPs. Another issue that you are forgetting is Thermodynamics: you cannot obtain something from nothing. The first posts clearly breaks this. You need energy to do all the cycle, once you have expanded the gas, you need energy from somewhere to compress it and cool it.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 29, 2008 23:00:13 GMT -4
(I've seen guys using PICs as mere flip-flops). Guilty! I'm at this moment using an 8 MHz AVR with 1K of flash ROM, running six lines of compiled C, on a target board with programing header power supply and ballast resistors, to blink an LED. But that's because my car got broken into again. This was the fastest blinking LED I could lay my hands on and a good shape to double-stick in a cranny of the dashboard. Ingenious
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 29, 2008 22:58:07 GMT -4
They are pure evil...
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 29, 2008 13:23:36 GMT -4
What the holy hell were they thinking? apart from risking their lives, they put the police, the drivers and the journalist's lives in serious danger. Any other proof to say that drugs are terrible for human beings? Do not the police in Britain carry guns?
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 27, 2008 23:11:41 GMT -4
Right, whenever anyone brags to me that his handheld is more powerful than a guidance computer, I propose that we boil the handheld, then put it in a paint mixer and cycle the power every two seconds. If the handheld fails, I get to shoot its owner in the head. The fastest computer is the one that stays together in the intended environment. True, very well noted. In fact, I believe that the technologies that will be used within Orion are going to be very similar to those in 1969. I do not think that the engineers at NASA are going to rely on general purpose processors that are way too much integrated. After all my years at Electronics Engineering, I've started to hate PICs, they are too popular and they are abused as a solution to everything, wasting processing power and the modularity required at some highly specialized tasks. (I've seen guys using PICs as mere flip-flops).
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 27, 2008 11:59:19 GMT -4
Sorry, I could not resist it, Conker's Bad Fur Day, It's War!
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 27, 2008 11:44:10 GMT -4
You have just said it! That's the main problem for a Moon Expedition: money. Unfortunately, now that the Congress is debating the rescue plan for USA economy, it's certain that budgets are going to have a nice cut.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 27, 2008 11:26:43 GMT -4
It's been a really good time for news about science (except the failure at CERN), Jetman flying above Calais and then China sending taikonauts into orbit. Oh no! the flag is waving, this is all fake!! (just kidding ;D)
|
|
|
Jetman
Sept 26, 2008 12:23:08 GMT -4
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 26, 2008 12:23:08 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 24, 2008 15:32:55 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 23, 2008 22:59:37 GMT -4
3rdrock is not coming back... me thinks. Not only do I doubt he's coming back, I think he's writing book like I'm writing the formula for Transparent Aluminum!! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 23, 2008 22:23:22 GMT -4
3rdrock is not coming back... me thinks.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 21, 2008 23:30:11 GMT -4
Moon is not that forbidding after all, the chart shows a very close resemblance with Earth's temperature (at least the temperature of the poles). Wonder what are the HB going to say about this topic.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 21, 2008 23:19:01 GMT -4
Sorry you're wrong. Try watching Earthstorm. It's like mixing up Armageddon, The Core, The Day after Tomorrow, and Sunshine, taking out the good science, the good acting, and the good plotlines, then half baking what is left. Then it's not a movie! ;D
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 21, 2008 19:59:12 GMT -4
Is 1969 tech better than 2008's? The answer: Depends on the context.
The tech used in 1969 worked very well back then. However, 2008 tech has evolved from older technologies (new technologies have emerged as well), however the problem is the same: to put a man on the moon. NASA is making an extensive research to know exactly how the technologies available nowadays will solve the problem, the same way they did in 1969.
However, you came here posting very long statements and you often make circular references to your claims without even considering that you may be wrong. If that is the case, why are you here if there is no way to make you change your mind? You are so convinced (as we are convinced about the Apollo reality) about your ideas, that there is no point in trying to make a healthy conversation with you.
|
|