Page 3 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Thank you, Ma'am. At least two of us have given this some reasoned thought. I can't recall the spelling of the name: I thought it might be "Chronus", as in the god of time... But I could be mistaken, as I was once, on July 29, 1952.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I believe it's the same dude, although classical mythology isn't my strong suit. (I'm better with Norse mythology. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> ) The correct spelling uses Greek letters, so Kronos, Cronus, and Chronos are probably all legitimate.<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>I know this sounds a bit corny, and I'd rather not associate the new program with sci-fi, but what about "Vulcan"? It is a simple, two syllable name, with a sort of power to it. "Hercules" also might be a good choice, though that might be a good name for the heavy-lift launch vehicle.<br /><br />Or, what about "Odyseus" (sp)? Wasn't that the other name for Jason of the Golden Fleece quest?<br />After all, this is the beginning of a new quest for knowledge and possibly riches of one kind or another. "Project Odyseus"...has kind of a ring to it. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Ooooh, Odysseus! I like, I like, I like! Okay, that's my new favorite. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />Odysseus was a Greek hero. He may have been an actual person. He was the lord of an island whose name escapes me at the moment. He supported the Greek king Agamemnon when his wife, Helen, was abducted off to Troy. He brought a large force to support Agamemnon and together they sailed to Troy and went to war for ten years. (Achilles was another of the major lords/generals/whatever supporting Agamemnon.) Ultimately, the Greeks won. It took Odysseus another ten years to get back home, and he had many adventures along the way which are detailed in the famous epic poem "The Odyssey", by Homer. (It's prequel is the "Iliad", which relates the events of <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em> -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
> <i><font color="yellow">"Project Cancellation"? I know it's a bad pun, but nevertheless...</font>/i><br /><br />Project Tower of Babel 2.0.<br /><br />As I mentioned in another thread, it looks like the fourth major NASA facility is about to be hit by a hurricane in two years. If you are into "Acts of God" or "Devine Retribution", maybe God is trying to send a message and kill the NASA manned space program.</i>
And if your not? Then you can say, damn. Why did we build these facilities as close to the equator and coast as we could. Knowing that the areas are geographically prone to these climatic phenomana and that human meedling of the morphology would enhance the damage done.<br /><br />Its like building your house on a flood plane. Its called a flood plane because it floods.<br /><br /><font color="red">DO NO HARM</font>/safety_wrapper>
Why build close to the coast and the equator? It's called range safety and rotational boost. <br /><br />You need somewhere uninhabited for spent rockets to fall in, for the US launching anything other than polar payloads that means the east coast. You also want to launch as close to the equator as possible to get maximum benefit from the earth's rotation. You also need low latitudes to launch to the Moon, planets, and GEO. Therefore for the US the launch site has to be as far south as possible. Florida is the only logical choice for launches. <br /><br />All other facilities are sited by accidents of historical and political geography. <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em> Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
Hey, don't forget that "CAESAR" for the Crew Launch Vehicle (SRB etc) was MY idea!!!<br /><br />Where's my medal... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!! LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>
"I like the idea of Apollo 18. But more realistically, what about Apollo 2020. "<br /><br />It makes sense that any manned moon program could fall under the umbrella of Apollo. To separate them from the first program, how about Apollo 2K? The individual missions could be Apollo 2k1, 2k2, etc. But it might be a mouthful by the time they get to Apollo 2k17.<br /><br />But I also like the Apollo V2.0, especially if they continue to evolve the systems with incremental improvements.<br /><br />As for the launchers themselves, "The Stick" will probably stick (pardon the pun). The HLV definitely needs a powerful name, such as Hercules. Perhaps "Fusion" could work as a coming-together of various systems. I'd like to reserve Magnum for a hopeful 4-SRB version, if they ever plan towards such a beast. <br /><br />Ah, I can hear it now:<br />"And we have liftoff of the Apollo 2k27 mission! Riding a Hercules Magnum booster, this is the third flight of the Apollo V2.3 capsule affectionately named 'MoonScanner' by the crew, which consists of (insert 4-6 names here). They will be landing their 'MoonRaker' lunar lander at First Base, established at the lunar south pole. All systems are functioning flawlessy as the five liquid main engines now throttle back to reduce the MaxQ loads as well as conserve fuel for later in the ascent."
> <i><font color="yellow">for the US launching anything other than polar payloads that means the east coast.</font>/i><br /><br />I believe the first (now second?) SpaceX Falcon I is to be launched into a "normal" (i.e., non-polar) orbit from Vandenberg, CA.<br /><br />Does anyone know where a map is of rocket paths for launches out of Vandenberg? I know you can launch South-East for a while over water, but eventually you need to head East over land.</i>
Sorry, my "launch commentary" was largely wishful thinking, hoping a more evolved version (V2.3 capsule, 27th Apollo 2k mission) might carry more than four crew. And while I can't seem to find the articles now, the articles I've read have said the HLV could maybe (not would) be man-rated. <br /><br />Hmm, but no comment on the possibility of a 4 SRB version, SG? Interesting.... But then I'm probably just dreaming again.
> <i><font color="yellow">The launches are mainly to the south to south west depending on the desired inclination. A "normal" i.e. eastward launch is not possible out of Vandenberg.</font>/i><br /><br />Wow, I have always wondered about Vandenberg. So was SpaceX going to put their first satellite in an East-to-West orbit? For an equivalent launch vehicle, is there a rough estimate available of the difference in mass to orbit from Florida (West-to-East) versus a Vandenberg (East-to-West)? That is, how much is gained from using the rotation of the Earth versus going against the rotation of the Earth?<br /><br />Or am I just really confused about what SpaceX planned for their first launch...?</i>
Crew Launcher: Icarus<br />Heavy Launcher: Daedalus<br /><br />CEV: State <br />Lunar Lander: State Capital<br /><br />Daedalus and Icarus, because once again we are escaping the pull the Earth. And as long as Icarus doesn't stray too close to the sun...<br /><br />We name battleships after states, why not the CEVs? And think how US Citizens would rally around their CEV. You could work some good PR around that.