I bet the dinosaurs were too smart to believe that NASA is at fault when space rocks (or exploding trucks) hit the road in Africa.
incompetence leading eventually to a global incontinence incident
We're an egocentric species. While we believe ourselves to be at the top of the food chain the bacteria, viruses and fungi that make up one half of our bodies might disagree.
Each of us is a universe that's mostly distracted from reality.
During the 400 million year long orbit of our Solar System around the galactic center, the Earth has encountered areas of space during which mankind in its short sojourn wasn't onboard. So when I mention an incident of global incontinence, I shit you not.
On whole we're dumber than the dinosaurs. We're like the pissant with a hard on floating down the river on a turd yelling "Raise the drawbridge." We think too much of ourselves.
Re: Thank god NASA is on the look out or are they?
Posted: Sat May 02, 2020 5:05 pm
by BoSoxGal
Is it even possible to track meteors? Asteroids and comets sure, they have a predictable orbit, but meteors don’t. Astronomers look for them and try to locate impact sites where possible, but they can’t be predicted. So, no.
I’m not sure how you think there is any NASA incompetence exhibited by a meteor strike in Nigeria.
Re: Thank god NASA is on the look out or are they?
Posted: Sat May 02, 2020 8:10 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
Re: Thank god NASA is on the look out or are they?
Is it even possible to track meteors? Asteroids and comets sure, they have a predictable orbit, but meteors don’t. Astronomers look for them and try to locate impact sites where possible, but they can’t be predicted. So, no.
I’m not sure how you think there is any NASA incompetence exhibited by a meteor strike in Nigeria.
They didn't catch the one in Chelyabinsk in 2013 either. Where is NASA on that today?
"The Chelyabinsk meteor was a small asteroid — about the size of a six-story building — that broke up over the city of Chelyabinsk, Russia, on Feb. 15, 2013. The blast was stronger than a nuclear explosion, triggering detections from monitoring stations as far away as Antarctica. The shock wave it generated shattered glass and injured about 1,200 people. Some scientists think the meteor was so bright it may have briefly outshone the sun.
The incident was another reminder to space agencies about the importance of monitoring small bodies in space that could pose a threat to Earth. The same day Chelyabinsk happened, the U.S. House of Representatives' Science, Space, and Technology Committee said it would hold a hearing to discuss asteroid threats to Earth and how to mitigate them as an addition to NASA's current efforts."
Re: Thank god NASA is on the look out or are they?
Posted: Sun May 03, 2020 5:00 am
by MajGenl.Meade
You should read you own (uncited) quotes
NASA has been searching for potentially hazardous objects for decades; the threshold for detection, however, is pegged at a size that's much larger than the Chelyabinsk bolide. For example, in 2005, Congress asked NASA to find 90 percent of near-Earth objects that are more than 450 feet (140 m) in diameter. As of 2018, it's probable that about three-quarters of 25,000 potentially hazardous asteroids are still waiting to be found.
Asteroid detection will likely be much improved with the completion of the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) in Chile, which will scan the sky for incoming threats. LSST is expected to start work in the 2020s and continue operation for at least a decade, according to the LSST website.
NASA has been searching for potentially hazardous objects for decades; the threshold for detection, however, is pegged at a size that's much larger than the Chelyabinsk bolide. For example, in 2005, Congress asked NASA to find 90 percent of near-Earth objects that are more than 450 feet (140 m) in diameter. As of 2018, it's probable that about three-quarters of 25,000 potentially hazardous asteroids are still waiting to be found.
Asteroid detection will likely be much improved with the completion of the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) in Chile, which will scan the sky for incoming threats. LSST is expected to start work in the 2020s and continue operation for at least a decade, according to the LSST website.
Congress knew there was another problem in 2013 and now sometime in the 2020s the telescope will start working because it was funded by the Dept. of Energy? Wow! When did NASA become a part of the Dept. of Energy?
I guess mass extinction events aren't a priority for NASA. I wonder what was more important.
Maybe NASA's crystal ball told them we have nothing to be concerned about in our 400 million year long orbit. You'd think the five known mass extinction events during that orbit would indicate otherwise.
Just for grins and giggles plot that orbit and mark the mass extinction events. Keep in mind plate tectonics may have destroyed the evidence of more than a few.
While we're talking about incompetence, ever read the story of the O ring business that exposed NASA's ... incompetence?
For extra credit what does this tell you about overlapping missions? Does the left hand know what the right hand is doing?
Re: Thank god NASA is on the look out or are they?
Posted: Sun May 03, 2020 11:47 am
by MajGenl.Meade
Didn't read the whole article, didja? heh heh heh
Wash your hands three times a day
Always do what your mom and dad say
Brush your teeth in the following way
Wash your hands three times a day
Re: Thank god NASA is on the look out or are they?
Posted: Mon May 04, 2020 2:02 pm
by Darren
Let's just throw a half a billion dollars away when we launch.
"It is true that the shuttle main engine, or RS-25, is the Ferrari of rocket engines. NASA designed these brilliant engines in the 1970s for the space shuttle program, during which they each flew multiple launches. A total of 46 engines were built for the shuttle at an estimated cost of $40 million per engine. But now these formerly reusable engines will be flown a single time on the SLS rocket and then dropped into the ocean.
There are four engines on a Space Launch System rocket. At this price, the engines for an SLS rocket alone will cost more than $580 million. This does not include the costs of fabricating the rocket's large core stage, towering solid-rocket boosters, an upper stage, or the costs of test, transportation, storage, and integration. With engine prices like these, it seems reasonable to assume that the cost of a single SLS launch will remain $2 billion in perpetuity.
Just to summarize that for you: NASA is spending at least three times more for an engine that was previously built for reuse, but now is expendable. And in the news release, Aerojet brags about reducing the price of these engines."
