NASA's new spaceship????

[rickstine]

Everyone know's what the space shuttle,but the space shuttle is old and damaged.NASA not going to replace them probably until they all blow up.Remember the X plane.NASA could have had a cheaper way of getting into space than the old school way of lunching it off a launch pad.<br /><br /> If NASA takes a Boeing 747 and double it's size and drop a large space shuttle in mid flight ,NASA could save millions to billions of dollars a year,which could allow a better and coast effective space shuttle and more money to improve it.<br /><br />The idea that I used is nothing new I got it from the the x plane-15, this aircraft went on the edge of space and this was back in the late 1960's to early 70's.But NASA decided to be wasteful and blow their money.You can't launch a the space shuttle over and over again and expect to be fine.I know the shuttle is inspected every flight,but the frame over time can't hande it anymore.I say stop using 1970 tech and use tech from the 21st centuary,but remeber what worked and what diden't.

 

[najab]

><i>Everyone know's what the space shuttle,but the space shuttle is old and damaged.</i><p>I dare say that <b>you</b> don't know what the Space Suttle (more properly the Space Transportation System) is, or you wouldn't make a silly statement like that. The Shuttle Orbiter <b>components</b> of the STS are old, but they aren't damaged.<br /><br /> /><i>NASA not going to replace them probably until they all blow up.</i><p>Given that none have blown up yet, that's another silly statement.<br /><br /> /><i>Remember the X plane.</i><p>I remember X-Plane, it's a <i>really</i> challenging flight simulator for *nix systems.<br /><br /> /><i>NASA could have had a cheaper way of getting into space than the old school way of <b>lunching</b> it off a launch pad.</i><p>I agree, plus the bits of rocket between your teeth are the devil to get out.<br /><br /> /><i>If NASA takes a Boeing 747 and double it's size and drop a large space shuttle in mid flight ,NASA could save millions to billions of dollars a year,which could allow a better and coast effective space shuttle and more money to improve it.</i><p>Plus the resulting holes in the ground could be used for landfills and artificial lakes.<br /><br /> /><i>The idea that I used is nothing new I got it from the the x plane-14, this aircraft went on the edge of space and this was back in the late 1960's to early 70's.</i><p>No, no it didn't.<br /><br /> /><i>But NASA decided to be wasteful and blow their money.</i><p>Yeah, that last trip up to Atlantic City didn't go so well.<br /><br /> /><i>You can't launch a the space shuttle over and over again and expect to be fine.</i><p>Why not? That is, after all, what it was designed to do.<br /><br /> /><i>I know the shuttle is inspected every flight,but the frame over time can't hande it anymore.</i><p>Well, yes, I suppose that is true, but considering it was designed for 100 flights, and OV-103 has, what, 29? I'd say they're good for a few more flights each.<br /><br /> /><i>I say stop using 1970 tech and use tech from th</i></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></p>

 

[spacefire]

oh you are such an ass! but a funny one! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[rickstine]

HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH,I made a simple error and I will fix it,and you are king of the castle in your own mind,but arn't we all.I'll have to say some more than others.

 

[rickstine]

I would have to say a was hard on them,at the time they did not have the tech,but just scraping the idea and throwing it away,this idea makes no sense,but it probably did back then I guess it did with the making of the space shuttle in all.

 

[rickstine]

The space shuttle was made to be reused,but it's just plane crap today and in the early 90's.You can't expect to launch the space shuttle over and over again without giving very little thought for over 20 years of service,but they did update the computers and make repairs.But you can't fill in a dam that ten feet wide with your finger.And I do know their are better ways than what I wrote.What I really want NASA to do is make a magantic railway in way it is shoot off into space.It's a good idea and less expensive.I know NASA got their ideas from the x-planes,and I'm not saying ban every thing from the 20th centuary.I'm saying use what worked for space travel from 20th centuary space tech and apply old ideas at the time that coulden't work because they were so far ahead of their time.<br /><br />(Example) The Flying Wing Could not work before computers ,because it was unstable and some crashed ,but the idea was not scrapped and was used to build the stealth bomber.I sure you already know that.<br /><br />I don't hate 70's tech because that were we are today,what I mean is the tech used in the 70's have been updated and are much better,that 's how tech improves over lesser tech.<br /> (That's how we got computer's to do more than just add divide,.etc.)

 

[nacnud]

<center><font face="Wide Latin">Don't feed the trolls</font></center><br /><br />Rickstine, take a look around, there are alot of pro/anti shuttle threads on this site, try reading a few because you're making yourself look foolish with this diatribe.<br /><br />

 

[gavino]

I do belive that the space shuttle is old but they all ready a dead line when they will stop useing it and thats 2010. The truth is that NASA all ready has replace ments for the Space shuttle and the testing phase. NASA needs that Shuttle to finish ISS or it will never be done. Just hold on here NASA is working at top speed to get these things on track. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><span style="font-style:italic" class="Apple-style-span">gavinovz</span></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[rickstine]

I know NASA is building a new kind is shuttle and they can't get rid of it until 2010,I do understand that because they still need it to build the ISS.

 

[rickstine]

I know things like this need to be tested and teted over and over again.