zerocool
Recent Actions
-
Commented on A Wet Moon Is Hot Once Again
This guy seems to have some extra information. Looks like the 1000 days might be accurate. http://www.americaspace.org/?p=364 Editor's note: This website americaspace.org belongs to Jim Hillhouse...
Comment Threads
-
Eagle_Eye commented on
A Wet Moon Is Hot Once Again
The budget will need to be assigned to JSC Engineering, its not something they can skim off other projects, its too large. That said wouldn't it add more drama and excitement to the 1000 day milestone if a similar but with slightly different objectives project were also announced and led from another center like say MSFC. This would add a little competition to the mix and serve the role the REDS did during Apollo. JSC vs. MSFC, Texas vs. Alabama where can I buy tickets. And KSC wins either way(so much for one NASA... Hehehehehe)...
-
dbooker commented on
A Wet Moon Is Hot Once Again
The only issue that I can see on this is that this was tried before with just in house engineering and it was canceled. It was the X-38 See Wayne Hale's 11/5/09 blog. http://blogs.nasa.gov/cm/blog/waynehalesblog. Too bad the engineers that were developing this spacecraft didn't do what Franklin Chang-Diaz did with the VASIMR technology and sign a deal with NASA to take it private. I guess it may be hard to be think like an entrepreneur when you're a civil servant engineer....
-
Maxwell commented on
A Wet Moon Is Hot Once Again
Three years to put a lander on the moon? Seems a bit redundant at this point. Lcross worked the way it did to get around the need for a more expensive ground robot. We've learned about as much as we're going to before someone goes to the moon and takes hundreds of direct samples from multiple target craters. Not to say another robot is a bad idea, but the chances are good its results will be either inconclusive or the selection too limited for scientists to believe there is as much water as long range scans show....
-
bombcatcher commented on
A Wet Moon Is Hot Once Again
X-38 was cancelled in 2002. Flight-testing began in March of 1998 with vehicle 131, which means it was in design and fab long before that. Hale, in his blog, refers to X-38 as a skunk work project. He might try to attach that description to X-38, but truth be told it missed one key idea -> skunk work type projects should not take that long. The real issue with X-38 was it took too darn long. If you look at almost every major Lockheed Skunk Works project, they were all completed very quickly. Extraordinarily quickly. So, it appears that JSC...
-
BrianM commented on
A Wet Moon Is Hot Once Again
Super! First bright news we've seen in a really long time. It sounds like an excellent program, on a timely basis and schedule, and really is exactly what has been required for 10-15 years in order to train some NASA JSC people in how to carry out a project succesfully. The last effort anything like it was X-38, and before that was NASA Mir. We've just been marking time and going in bureaucratic circles since. It is surprising that NASA public relations does not make use of news like this; following on the heels of the LCROSS water discovery, it...
Following
Not following anyone
About This Page
Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.
Monthly Archives
- September 2010 (10)
- August 2010 (107)
- July 2010 (123)
- June 2010 (117)
- May 2010 (126)
- April 2010 (107)
- March 2010 (99)
- February 2010 (144)
- January 2010 (74)
- December 2009 (91)
- November 2009 (109)
- October 2009 (151)
- September 2009 (108)
- August 2009 (110)
- July 2009 (170)
- June 2009 (151)
- May 2009 (116)
- April 2009 (119)
- March 2009 (111)
- February 2009 (86)
- January 2009 (128)
- December 2008 (119)
- November 2008 (120)
- October 2008 (142)
- September 2008 (134)
- August 2008 (122)
- July 2008 (119)
- June 2008 (130)
- May 2008 (128)
- April 2008 (146)
- March 2008 (102)
- February 2008 (82)
- January 2008 (113)
- December 2007 (112)
- November 2007 (100)
- October 2007 (108)
- September 2007 (99)
- August 2007 (136)
- July 2007 (73)
- June 2007 (118)
- May 2007 (102)
- April 2007 (118)
- March 2007 (108)
- February 2007 (131)
- January 2007 (104)
- December 2006 (95)
- November 2006 (77)
- October 2006 (114)
- September 2006 (120)
- August 2006 (117)
- July 2006 (130)
- June 2006 (123)
- May 2006 (113)
- April 2006 (122)
- March 2006 (136)
- February 2006 (104)
- January 2006 (115)
- December 2005 (71)
- November 2005 (99)
- October 2005 (94)
- September 2005 (117)
- August 2005 (104)
- July 2005 (122)
- June 2005 (152)
- May 2005 (107)
- April 2005 (148)
- March 2005 (138)
- February 2005 (94)
- January 2005 (82)
- December 2004 (93)
- November 2004 (82)
- October 2004 (73)
- September 2004 (64)
- August 2004 (53)
- July 2004 (37)
- June 2004 (8)
- May 2004 (8)
- March 2004 (4)
- February 2004 (1)
- January 2004 (7)
- December 2003 (5)
- November 2003 (2)
- October 2003 (1)
- September 2003 (2)
- August 2003 (1)
- July 2003 (1)
- June 2003 (1)
- May 2003 (1)
- April 2003 (1)
- March 2003 (1)
- February 2003 (1)
- January 2003 (7)
- December 2002 (3)
- December 2001 (2)
- December 2000 (2)
- December 1999 (2)
- December 1998 (2)
- December 1997 (2)
Categories
- Aeronautics (131)
- Aircraft (6)
- Ares, Orion, Altair, Constellation (331)
- Ask The Administrator (18)
- Astrobiology (95)
- Astronauts (156)
- Astronomy (47)
- Budget (376)
- Canadian Space Agency Watch (1)
- Cape Canaveral (16)
- China (78)
- Columbia (35)
- Commercialization (880)
- Congress (357)
- Culture (109)
- Earth Science (95)
- Education (340)
- Election 2004 (50)
- Election 2008 (125)
- Exploration (1021)
- Financial Management (39)
- Gorby (3)
- Hubble (82)
- ISS News (559)
- IT/Web (141)
- Internet Policies (75)
- NASA Culture (21)
- New Moon Rising (7)
- News (1413)
- Personnel News (632)
- Policy (166)
- Poll (2)
- Procurement (17)
- Russia (99)
- Safety (20)
- Shuttle News (672)
- Shuttle News 1997-2003 (9)
- Space & Planetary Science (720)
- Space Elevators (3)
- Space Tourism (3)
- Transition (137)
- Videos (175)
- Workforce (80)
- suborbital (4)
Copyright © Reston Communications. All rights reserved. This site is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
This website does not have any connection whatsoever with, endorsement by, or authorization from, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration nor does any product or service being offered or made available to the public have the authorization, support, sponsorship, or endorsement of, or the development, use, or manufacture by or on behalf of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
