|
||||||||
Space and Astronomy Thread |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1101 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,378
|
Quote:
I would call landing on the moon in 1969 and 40 years later, still not achieving any thing better, a loss of momentum.
Quote:
They can't afford the main system they are building. Plus if like some people might want, they simply sell their system to the Europeans, if it go's wrong and their people get stranded, the back up will be no good as its the same technology.
Who says the back up has to be the same technology just because it is from the same nation or agency? Quote:
America has refused to cooperate with any other agency on their constellation program. They are only doing it for Mars robotic science because their broke.
If anything, that would apply to the ESA's Mars rover plans which now looks like it will be based on mostly American technology. What I often read and hear from ESA and other European officials is this arrogant attitude that presumes that NASA should cooperate with them. Quote:
A lot of ESA / NASA joint projects are simply cancelled half way through by the American administration at the time.
ESA has always tried for international cooperation, so the whole human race can go in to space together. If any one is arrogant it is the Americans. Now at this point in the NASA space flight forums I would get permanently banned for outrageous comments. ![]() No, the arrogance comes from the European side that presumes that so-called international cooperation should take place. I say "so-called" because ESA only brings up "international cooperation" when they either don't have the funds or the technological know how, or a combination of the two, to complete a project. Lets face it, the European agencies like ESA are actually far more nationalistic than NASA is. They are the ones with the huge chips on their shoulders of always trying to prove they can match or exceed American technology or accomplishments similar to the way the Soviets were, right down to copying actual missions or hardware. If they are capable of producing something entirely on their own then that is the way it will surely be done. Quote:
ESA has even tried to work with the Russians and Japan. The Russian just wanted our money in return for a few seats as usual. They would build it and launch it from Russia.
Quote:
ESA is the most cooperative and efficient space agency going in the world and Britain should have a single agency of its own to play a much bigger part in ESA's missions.
I've already addressed its so-called "cooperative" stance. Quote:
Americas main contribution to ISS has been the shuttles cargo capacity. I am all for Europeans having their own capacity to provide their fair share, in the same way they should militarily in their defence.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1102 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Alacant
Posts: 7,773
|
Quote:
Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has re imaged the Apollo 17 landing site from its operational orbit giving 50cm per pixel resolution
http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/?archi...o-17-Site.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#1103 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,494
|
Quote:
Only if you consider space exploration as just landing men on a distant body.
Quote:
Most aerospace/space programs go over budget. No surprise there.
Who says the back up has to be the same technology just because it is from the same nation or agency? Remember when one shuttle failed they had no back up, all were grounded. They then relied on the Russians. Quote:
Nonsense. Shared programs are simply a way to offset costs. That doesn't necessarily translate into an agency being "broke."
Quote:
If anything, that would apply to the ESA's Mars rover plans which now looks like it will be based on mostly American technology.
Quote:
What I often read and hear from ESA and other European officials is this arrogant attitude that presumes that NASA should cooperate with them.
Why not state the real reason, that some British people are just so pro American and anti European whatever the benefits, that they have extended their prejudice in to space. Quote:
It isn't "arrogant" to protect a nation's technology or to expect anyone but American astronauts to fly in American spacecraft.
Quote:
No, the arrogance comes from the European side that presumes that so-called international cooperation should take place.
Quote:
I say "so-called" because ESA only brings up "international cooperation" when they either don't have the funds or the technological know how, or a combination of the two, to complete a project.
Apollo was built on German engineering, British know how and American money. When will people learn America is best because it has the most high quality real estate in the world, a quirk of history. Fill it up with people, add democracy and capitalism and bingo you have a super power. They simply spend their way to success. Other nations do it more by their own ingenuity. America has good scientists too, although many are educated by the British tax payer and leave because of hopeless politicians. Quote:
Lets face it, the European agencies like ESA are actually far more nationalistic than NASA is. They are the ones with the huge chips on their shoulders of always trying to prove they can match or exceed American technology or accomplishments similar to the way the Soviets were, right down to copying actual missions or hardware.
Quote:
If they are capable of producing something entirely on their own then that is the way it will surely be done.
Because they don't have the funds or the know how. America has financed the majority of it, not to mention all the American technology and hardware that is in it. ESA doesn't always have the funds, but it has the Know -how. In a couple of years it won't even need any Russian re-entry tech. It's they hare and the tortoise. If American keeps messing around and scrapping projects, ESA will simply catch them up sooner or later. The man rating of rockets is Americans main advantage now. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1104 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,378
|
Quote:
Well its the most difficult, so therefore it is the benchmark.
Quote:
So they are going to build two completely separate constellation programs are they. No one else but Europe can be relied on to help them, if they get stuck in space.
America has done just fine on its own. It doesn't need ESA to conduct its space program. Quote:
Remember when one shuttle failed they had no back up, all were grounded. They then relied on the Russians.
Quote:
So it's OK for America to ask for cooperation, just not Europe.
Quote:
America benefits just as much. Hope it's not the American tech that doesn't know the difference between metric and imperial.
As for the metric comment what does that have to do with America's obviously proven capabilities to conduct its own space exploration? Quote:
So its not OK to ask now is it. How many people in this country are always moaning about Europe trying to duplicate everything America does. Galileo and GPS for example. When ESA want to cooperate, then they get called arrogant.
Quote:
Why not state the real reason, that some British people are so pro American and anti European whatever the benefits, that they have extended their prejudice in to space.
Quote:
Fine, shame they didn't think like that when we handed over radar, the secret to super sonic flight and superior nuclear technology. What we got in return was having to pay for their systems and no science or industry of our own.
![]() Quote:
Thankfully the French still have some patriotism and pride in science and technology.
And if you value their "patriotism and pride in science and technology" then you need to also value America's. Quote:
That's just your opinion not backed up by any facts.
Quote:
ESA just ask, if the Americans say no they say fine and go and do it themselves anyway. It just takes longer because they have less money.
It isn't just a question of money but also access to technology that they want. Quote:
Apollo was built on German engineering, British know how and American money.
Quote:
When will people learn America is best because it has the most high quality real estate in the world, a quirk of history. Fill it up with people, add democracy and capitalism and bingo you have a super power. They simply spend their way to success. Other nations do it more by their own ingenuity. They have good scientists too, although many are educated by the British tax payer and leave because of hopeless politicians.
Quote:
No, they just don't see why they can't play their part in human space flight and exploration too. British people who's idea of a space program is watching the Americans on the television are the true un-patriots. Britain can't be great again in high resource tech again true, but Europe can and its better to be a partner than a customer.
Quote:
Well if you build an international space station then you have an obligation to your partners. No one forced America to get involved.
Quote:
ESA doesn't always have the funds, but it has the Know -how. In a couple of years it won't even need any Russian re-entry tech.
Quote:
It's they hare and the tortoise. If American keeps messing around and scrapping projects, ESA will simply catch them up sooner or later.
![]() Quote:
The man rating of rockets is Americans main advantage now.
A lot of your comments, to include some jabs or attempts to discredit American technology, reflect perfectly the underlying attitude of the negative competition and one-upmanship behind many European technological projects in regards to America that I have mentioned. As I said, it comes across Soviet like. It is one of the main reasons why I don't think America should cooperate with Europe if it doesn't need to. The European attitude is often one of a future enemy, not of a friend and an ally. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1105 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,494
|
I think all your answers to my last post were simply opinions. I'm afraid we simply disagree on each point and as this is a thread, it's probably best to leave it up to other posters to have their say. I haven't read one shred of evidence that ESA is arrogant, or has ever demanded that America cooperate. In fact I have heard Obama is keen for NASA to cooperate much more internationally. It was apparently Bush and his merry band of right wing neo cons and senators, that didn't even trust their so called special relationship partner with any tech. The JSF RAF people nearly pulled out of the deal because no tech was being handed over in return for their investment.Quote:
Without even going into the details of the items you mentioned, what do you want America to do, be as stupid?
I do not want us to be as stupid. That's my point we were betrayed by people, too keen to please America and have nothing to do with Europe.Quote:
Why, because you think the UK will automatically have access to it? And if you value their "patriotism and pride in science and technology" then you need to also value America's.
I don't think the UK will automatically have access to it. If America wants to go its own way fine, but Europe has the right and the need to pursue its own space program. We must therefore withhold any tech we come up with like ATV auto docking etc. Russia doesn't want to work with us either. ESA tried offering cooperation, no one was interested, so what, they will just carry on with their own development, which is their right and Britain should concentrate on that. This so called third rate copying you accuse Russia and Europe of doing is just a way of saying you some how resent others being allowed to do what America does. Europe builds planes that outsell America ones. It took us longer, but if some had had their way, they never would have attempted it. One day America and China will start reserving land on the moon and Mars as their territory or colonies. Of course it will be the best bits, leaving all the latecomers with the rubbish. Hopefully Europeans will be their early enough to take their fair share or if you are not listened too, we all share equally as a planet. It is France that took British rocket tech and made some thing of it. They provide a launch base and ESA welcomes any European nation to have as much tech and industry as they are willing to invest. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1106 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,378
|
Quote:
I think all your answers to my last post were simply opinions.
I'm afraid we simply disagree on each point and as this is a thread, it's probably best to leave it up to other posters to have their say. Quote:
I haven't read one shred of evidence that ESA is arrogant, or has ever demanded that America cooperate. In fact I have heard Obama is keen for NASA to cooperate much more internationally.
What Obama wants to do has nothing to do with my comments or even your comment before it, in regards to ESA arrogance. Quote:
It was apparently Bush and his merry band of right wing neo cons and senators, that didn't even trust their so called special relationship partner
with any tech. The JSF RAF people nearly pulled out of the deal because no tech was being handed over in return for their investment.The whole building partnerships with other countries to encourage purchases and to minimise financial risk is a mistake anyway. America should stop giving away technology and jobs to other countries. And guess what, it was a "right wing" president that gave you and the rest of the world access to GPS so lose the "neo con" and "right wing" nonsense. Securing American technology and jobs has always been a concern to Democrats and Republicans so you don't know what you are talking about. Quote:
I do not want us to be as stupid. That's my point we were betrayed by people, too keen to please America and have nothing to do with Europe.
Quote:
I don't think the UK will automatically have access to it. If America wants to go its own way fine, but Europe has the right and the need to pursue its own space program. We must therefore withhold any tech we come up with like ATV auto docking etc. Russia doesn't want to work with us either.
If Europe wants to protect their own technology then good for them. Quote:
ESA tried offering cooperation, no one was interested, so what, they will just carry on with their own development, which is their right and Britain should concentrate on that.
This so called third rate copying you accuse Russia and Europe of doing is just a way of saying you some how resent others being allowed to do what America does. I also mentioned the Soviets, not Russia. The Soviets were America's enemy. Much of the thinking and actions of European agencies and companies are increasingly similar to the negative and even hostile competition that the Soviets engaged in. There is nothing wrong with competition. That is not what I am addressing. I am addressing the negative and often hostile sentiment and reasoning that goes behind such competition. Quote:
Europe builds planes that outsell America ones. It took us longer, but if some had had their way, they never would have attempted it.
Who are the "some" you speak of? After all, Boeing had plenty of domestic competition before there was a government created and subsidised Airbus. Quote:
moon and Mars as their territory or colonies. Of course it will be the best bits, leaving all the latecomers with the rubbish. Hopefully Europeans will be their early enough to take their fair share or if you are not listened too, we all share equally as a planet.
Yes, probably unlike you, I am not a socialist or a communist where I feel everything needs to be shared equally. That's another example of the thinking that I am talking about and warning about that comes out of Europe. Quote:
It is France that took British rocket tech and made some thing of it. They provide a launch base and ESA welcomes any European nation to have as much tech and industry as they are willing to invest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1107 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,567
|
Quote:
America should have claimed the entire moon for itself since they were the first and only country to reach it. Yes, probably unlike you, I am not a socialist or a communist where I feel everything needs to be shared equally. That's another example of the thinking that I am talking about and warning about that comes out of Europe. So? |
|
|
|
|
|
#1108 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: piggetville
Posts: 4,619
|
Quote:
Well that is the point they couldn't. You see there was a point where they thought they might lose the race to the moon so they signed a treating agreeing that no one nation could claim the moon.
I don't know all the technical stuff that goes on, but I love the nighy sky and had a small telescope when I was younger, I think there is something wonderfully innocent about the night sky. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1109 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Barrow in Furness
Posts: 908
|
I remember reading that, at one time, there were plans for the Shuttle to go into orbit with its external tank still attached. This was so that it could be used as in the construction of a space habitat. Partially pressurised; it could have been used to grow plants which could have helped convert CO2 to Oxygen. Does anyone know why the idea was dropped?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1110 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,567
|
Quote:
I remember reading that, at one time, there were plans for the Shuttle to go into orbit with its external tank still attached. This was so that it could be used as in the construction of a space habitat. Partially pressurised; it could have been used to grow plants which could have helped convert CO2 to Oxygen. Does anyone know why the idea was dropped?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1111 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,378
|
Quote:
Well that is the point they couldn't. You see there was a point where they thought they might lose the race to the moon so they signed a treaty agreeing that no one nation could claim the moon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1112 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,494
|
Firstly could you please state your nationality, are you British, American or other? I am British and always have been. Quote:
Well, that's one way to dismiss and not answer someone's views.
Quote:
What Obama wants to do has nothing to do with my comments or even your comment before it, in regards to ESA arrogance.
Quote:
Why should it? In terms of national security no sane nation should freely give away its most advanced technology.
Quote:
The whole building partnerships with other countries to encourage purchases and to minimise financial risk is a mistake anyway. America should stop giving away technology and jobs to other countries.
Quote:
And guess what, it was a "right wing" president that gave you and the rest of the world access to GPS so lose the "neo con" and "right wing" nonsense.
Quote:
Securing American technology and jobs has always been a concern to Democrats and Republicans so you don't know what you are talking about.
Quote:
Sorry, but autodocking is not some new technology that ESA came up with.
If Europe wants to protect their own technology then good for them. Quote:
Wrong, you are not reading my posts very carefully.
Quote:
I also mentioned the Soviets, not Russia. The Soviets were America's enemy. Much of the thinking and actions of European agencies and companies are increasingly similar to the negative and even hostile competition that the Soviets engaged in.
There is nothing wrong with competition. That is not what I am addressing. I am addressing the negative and often hostile sentiment and reasoning that goes behind such competition. Quote:
It also gets government subsidies far beyond Boeing's to make sure that is the case. Then they have the arrogance and nerve to think they should have a right to bid on tankers for the American Air Force.
Who are the "some" you speak of? After all, Boeing had plenty of domestic competition before there was a government created and subsidised Airbus. The some I speak of are members of UKIP, Tory party and other right wingers who could be classed a transatlantasist Britons. Quote:
America should have claimed the entire moon for itself since they were the first and only country to reach it.
Yes, probably unlike you, I am not a socialist or a communist where I feel everything needs to be shared equally. That's another example of the thinking that I am talking about and warning about that comes out of Europe. Sharing has a positive side as well as just being a communist or socialist practice. Britain has been given very bad deals from America over the years. We give them stuff for free and they take our gold or give us loans with terrible conditions. Maybe it is time the Europe and the US go their separate ways. At least we wont have to share the burden of their foolish foreign wars any more. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1113 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,494
|
Quote:
Dumb move on their part.
America would win but it would make Iraq look like a training exercise. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1114 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 411
|
.....anyhoo...... Can anyone help me??
I just got my first telescope (a Skywatcher skp1145eq1) and I'm struggling to put it together. No matter how tight I turn it, I can't get the Altitude Adjustment to lock. The tube just falls down to horizontal. It's not so bad if I take the counterweight off. Any advice???
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1115 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,567
|
Nice APOFTD today. "Average colour of the universe". See http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1116 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,567
|
Quote:
.....anyhoo...... Can anyone help me??
I just got my first telescope (a Skywatcher skp1145eq1) and I'm struggling to put it together. No matter how tight I turn it, I can't get the Altitude Adjustment to lock. The tube just falls down to horizontal. It's not so bad if I take the counterweight off. Any advice??? ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1117 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bishop-Auckland / Darlington
Posts: 6,636
|
Quote:
.....anyhoo...... Can anyone help me??
I just got my first telescope (a Skywatcher skp1145eq1) and I'm struggling to put it together. No matter how tight I turn it, I can't get the Altitude Adjustment to lock. The tube just falls down to horizontal. It's not so bad if I take the counterweight off. Any advice??? ![]() the 'eq1' part of the model number refers to the type of mount, known as the 'EQ-1' There should be 'T' bolts at the front and rear of the mount head. (below are a couple of pics of my own EQ-1 mount) The central hub of the tilting part of the head, has a cam sticking out below it, and inside the casing those two bolts push against front and rear of the cam, locking it in place. The nut in the centre plays no part in holding the mount at the correct angle - don't overtighten it, in case you snap the bolt. http://i38.tinypic.com/mtxmqb.jpg View into the front - you can see the end of the bolt, pushing against the cam http://i38.tinypic.com/2znwb4m.jpg **note** My own EQ-1 is a fair few years old - If yours is newer there nay be some cosmetic differences, but it should work the same way. Don't pay too much attention to the scale on the side - they aren't very accurate on basic mounts like the EQ-1 It is much better practice to set the altitude (lattitude) angle by pointing the telescope straight forwards on the mount, and racking it up until you get the Pole star (Polaris) in the centre of the view. Polaris isn't EXACTLY on the Pole - it's about 3/4 of a degree away - but that is MUCH more accurate than the scale on the side of an EQ-1 Also - don't overtighten those 'T' bolts either. They are commonly known among the astro-community as 'bendy-bolts' - in particular, the longer one at the rear has a tendency to bend down under the cam if you tighten it too much. Be sure to check out my astronomy forum.... www.astrochat.co.uk/forum ![]() Very beginner-friendly - there's loads of good people there, always happy to help out. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1118 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,567
|
The launch of the Aries 1. See http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap091102.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1119 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 411
|
Quote:
Hiya Pearl
Be sure to check out my astronomy forum.... www.astrochat.co.uk/forum ![]() Very beginner-friendly - there's loads of good people there, always happy to help out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1120 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bishop-Auckland / Darlington
Posts: 6,636
|
Quote:
Thanks. I will have a play when I get home from work.
![]() ![]() I've also noticed there's a version of the EQ-1 which has only one bolt (the rear one) which pushes on the cam - with a locking 'wing-nut' through the centre spindle. The bolt takes the weight, to stop it dropping forwards. From your description, this may be the version you have... If there's no bolt on the rear of your mount-head - look to see if there's a threaded hole there - maybe the bolt is missing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1121 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,683
|
I ve come across this a few times on the net
maybe someone can confirm or deny the sun declines in the sky all through the year and rises a degree further south each day until the 21st of december when it rises at its lowest or most southerly point then for a few days, its as though the sun isnt moving........... until on the 25th at last there is a movement of one degree North (so this is why that date was picked for the birth of Jesus ) But why should there be those 3 dead days with no movement ? (probably some connection with the 3 days in the tomb too I should think ! ) |
|
|
|
|
|
#1122 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bishop-Auckland / Darlington
Posts: 6,636
|
Quote:
But why should there be those 3 dead days with no movement ?
And the position of the Sun at sunrise varies, depending on where you are located... For example, from my location - the Sun's most Southerly 'rise' position this year falls on Dec 22, at an azimuth of 131° 40.265' It takes until Jan 2nd (11 days) for the position of the Sun at sunrise to shift a degree North from that point. The rise position of the Sun (as seen from UK) shifts at it's fastest around the 21st March and 21st Sept - and even then, only shifts by about 40 arcminutes a day (2/3 of a degree) **Figures checked using 'Starry-Night-Pro' astronomy software. The figures you have quoted are used in the movie 'Zeitgeist', and have been repeated in various places around the 'net.. Unfortunately - while many of the ideas expressed in 'Zeitgeist', about the links between Sun-worship / ancient astrology - and the 'Jesus-story' of Judao-Christain religions - do have SOME basis in fact.... The makers of Zeitgeist have exaggerated a lot of the details, or even just plain 'invented' some of them - in order to push their own agenda. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1123 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,683
|
The people in Egypt, Babylon etc were obviously big into astronomy back then ... reading the stars the moon and the sun etc,
Maybe those 3 days in december when the sun seems to stop......... are more pronounced from their viewpoint. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1124 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bishop-Auckland / Darlington
Posts: 6,636
|
Quote:
The people in Egypt, Babylon etc were obviously big into astronomy back then ... reading the stars the moon and the sun etc,
Maybe those 3 days in december when the sun seems to stop......... are more pronounced from their viewpoint. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1125 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bishop-Auckland / Darlington
Posts: 6,636
|
OK - I've run the figures for an observer located in Jerusalem.
I pretty-much knew before I did it, that at a lower lattitude, the Sun's movement would be even less pronounced, but didn't wanna say so until I checked the figures for sure.. Anyway..... Location Jerusalem... Most Southerly sunrise this year, pretty much identical Dec 21st and 22nd - only about 1/100th of an arcminute difference (1/6000th of a degree), with Dec 21st just shading it at 117° 19.078' Then it takes until Jan 5th (15 days) before the Sun rises ALMOST a full degree North of that point. Fastest shift from one day to the next, for an observer in Jerusalem, again comes at around 21st Mar, and 21st Sept. Only 32 arcmins shift from one day to the next. Egypt is even further South than Jerusalem, so figures for daily shift in sunrise as seen from there would be even less pronounced than Jerusalem. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:39.







with any tech. The JSF RAF people nearly pulled out of the deal because no tech was being handed over in return for their investment.