Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Contact problems!
Konrad
Ranger
in Zocalo v2.0
[URL=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22912-2003Dec22.html]Washington Post Article[/URL]
Well - After the blazing failures of "Cheaper, Faster, whatever..." what do you think? Three chances for great discovery or three chances to make more space junk?
I for one suspect it will be one feel good story, one cripple (eg - drives around but can do no scientific tests), and one utter failure. My faith in NASA is lacking - so you can guess which one I think will work well. ;) I just HOPE they can prove me wrong for once. :)
So: 1.5 out of 3 - place your bets now because there will be no after the fact "I KNEW IT" comments without having posted. :p
Well - After the blazing failures of "Cheaper, Faster, whatever..." what do you think? Three chances for great discovery or three chances to make more space junk?
I for one suspect it will be one feel good story, one cripple (eg - drives around but can do no scientific tests), and one utter failure. My faith in NASA is lacking - so you can guess which one I think will work well. ;) I just HOPE they can prove me wrong for once. :)
So: 1.5 out of 3 - place your bets now because there will be no after the fact "I KNEW IT" comments without having posted. :p
Comments
3 out of 3. Naturally. :)
However, my bet is on:
3 out of 3. :) If NASA haven't learnt from their mistakes (miles to km!!!!!) then they shouldn't try a lander again. :) I'm fairly sure the Beagle II will succeed, and I think the NASA scientists and engineers would have been well aware that their reputation was on the line when they sent off their two.
*cough* ...erm excuse me...
:rolleyes:
Because two third (and pretty accurately) of all Mars probes have failed.
[B]europeans doesn't fail[/B][/QUOTE]
Apparently, they fail English. :)
I'm going to say 3/3. Statistics don't mean anything... older landers had a 1/3 chance of making it, but from those old landers, we've learned some important lessons about how to NOT crash and burn.
And is it just me, or did that article seem to be saying [i]the US is going to chuck two hunks of billion-dollar metal at the largest convenient Martian rock[/i]?
[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/daily/graphics/mars_122303.html[/url]
[B][i]... If I have to register for one more damn article...[/i]
*cough* ...erm excuse me...
:rolleyes: [/B][/QUOTE]
Why do you think I only read what Konrad posted? ;)
As for the article - I know - I know - I hate it too - but it's 'free' and you only have to answer those three questions - I for one just enter thier example answers - hehe. :D
I was a little shocked at how slow the rovers are going to be over land - and the rather short life expectancy they have. I wonder how much of that is 'lowering the expectations so that all of us are thrilled with them if they go for longer.' Montgomery Scott style engineering... :rolleyes:
PS - This thread is about the current hopes and wonders the future of space exploration holds for us all - not nations and petty immature jabs - if NASA and the Russian Space Association can work together you can hold your tounge/fingers just once. Shame on you.
[B]Why do you think I only read what Konrad posted? ;) [/B][/QUOTE]
I didn't need to read that article. I'm the sort of person that follows these things closely anyway. :)
just remember human advancement in most fields is on a log curve... ie we go faster towards the future with every passing moment...
took us hundreds of thousands of years to develop language...
thousands of years to develop tools...
and only 100 to develop routine use of powered flight...
so that makes it about 50 for routine spaceflight...
give or take a few dodgy numbers...
my arse is going to the moon before 2020...
you watch :D
[B]eh.... fusion power shortly... the beginnings of 'giant mecha' in Japan...all going well we'll be bending some more laws of physics and leaving this little rock alot sooner than that...
just remember human advancement in most fields is on a log curve... ie we go faster towards the future with every passing moment...
took us hundreds of thousands of years to develop language...
thousands of years to develop tools...
and only 100 to develop routine use of powered flight...
so that makes it about 50 for routine spaceflight...
give or take a few dodgy numbers...
my arse is going to the moon before 2020...
you watch :D [/B][/QUOTE]
But there was also quite a bit of time between inventing, say, tools, and the airplane. :)
[B]eh.... fusion power shortly...
my arse is going to the moon before 2020...
you watch :D [/B][/QUOTE]
ah... Ate at Taco Bell again did you?
:p
Bean Fusion!
:D
[B][i]... If I have to register for one more damn article...[/i]
*cough* ...erm excuse me...
:rolleyes: [/B][/QUOTE]
Washington post registration is minor: It asks for sex, age, and zip code. Obviously you can lie on all 3. Then it stores that data in a cookie file. You have no usename or password. You don't give them an e-mail. No address. There is nothing linking you to the data you entered...
Less than 4 hours left...
The bad thing is that we won't actually find out until 8:30AM GMT.