It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

End Of Space Shuttle: An Ailen Agenda ?

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 




post by newcovenant
Really? I just saw a program that claimed they were ending those shuttle missions because the shuttle couldn't make it to Mars or even to the moon.


The shuttle wasn't designed to go to Mars or the Moon so that has nothing to do with the decommissioning , the clue is in the name , its a shuttle craft and not a space craft .
They are ending the missions for two simple reasons .
1..Age
2..cost




posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:17 AM
link   
The shuttle was always a distraction for public consumption. Obviously it was used for real work for civilian operations to claw back costs. But the genuine space travel is being conducted by the military. The problem is this distraction is now getting old and expensive.

Don't believe me then ask two questions 1: would the US military allow other nations (china) to access space and thus put the US military hardware in jeapordy without having their own means to get up there?

Second question : If you consider air flight by decade from 20's throigh to 60's, possibly 70's and look at the advancement what the hell has been developed IN THE SAME TIME FRAME!!! since then? A logical extension would suggest craft capable of reaching the moon and back in an afternoon!!!!!



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666

Originally posted by Wirral Bagpuss
I have been thinking. Is there a more covert reason why the Space Shuttle programme is being retired? Yes money and budget concerns are being cited but i cant help think there is much more to it than that. According to some reports in the UFO investigations Humans were told to stay away from the Moon. What is happening now? Is this a pre Disclourse move to ground all Earth vessels before the long awaited announcement?

What does everyone think?


That would be rather strange considering that the space shuttle program is supposed to be replaced by the constellation program, which would include a return to the moon. As soon as the radiation problems are figured out and how to keep personell cool when the temp raises to 200 degrees.


All that makes me wonder how the hell the USA put a manned rocket on the moon 40 years ago???



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by spolvil
 





All that makes me wonder how the hell the USA put a manned rocket on the moon 40 years ago???


They didn't, the rocket was used to the get lunar vehicle into space.




As soon as the radiation problems are figured out


I sincerely hope you aren't referring to the Van Allen Belts, as they have already dealt with that. The real danger for prolonged moon missions is solar flares. If a solar flare would to hit while they were on the surface of the moon, they would most likely die from the radiation exposure.

The answer to that, besides basically sitting 4 feet from your escape vehicle at all times, is underground bases and radiation shelters.

I'd suspect that, once established on the moon, a monitoring station could watch the sun and give even earlier advanced warning to income flares and mass ejections.

The sad reality is, unless we really come up with some actual artificial gravity system, we are basically tethered to earth. Every minute in zero G is damaging to the human body. Now the are actually thinking about reproduction in zero g, and if it would even work.

P.S. anyone notice how I completely ignored the insane and completely BS "facts" some of these people are posting? I suggest you start doing the same.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by newcovenant
 




post by newcovenant
Really? I just saw a program that claimed they were ending those shuttle missions because the shuttle couldn't make it to Mars or even to the moon.


The shuttle wasn't designed to go to Mars or the Moon so that has nothing to do with the decommissioning , the clue is in the name , its a shuttle craft and not a space craft .
They are ending the missions for two simple reasons .
1..Age
2..cost


I am actually well aware of those reasons and commented since it appeared you were against ending the program out of nostalgia (?) or perhaps a patriotic desire to see them remain in operation however as you acknowledge, this is actually a good thing.

The Space Shuttle was intended to make access to space a routine and inexpensive activity. However, in the 20 years since the first flight of the Space shuttle, access-to-space remains an expensive and relatively inflexible activity.3 For example, the price to launch a payload aboard the Space Shuttle is still $10,000/pound, a figure that has not gone down in over a decade. The goal for the replacement is to cut this cost by a factor of 10. Competing technologies, such as the European Arian 5 rocket, cost between $3500-$4500/pound.


It seems the smart route to take. We need to quit any romantic notion to keep these dinosaurs alive. Here is a good link and tells a little bit about what will come next. www.csa.com...


During its nearly one quarter century of service, the Space Shuttle has not only facilitated ground-breaking research which has given rise to countless technologies, but has also made great strides in making routine space flight, i.e. space tourism, a likely reality within the next few decades. But the two failures in the program's history, the Challenger and Columbia tragedies, have called the career of the Shuttle into question. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) came to the conclusion that because of the risks inherent in the original design of the Space Shuttle, because that design was based in many aspects on now-obsolete technologies, and because the Shuttle is now an aging system but still developmental in character, it is in the nation's interest to replace the Shuttle as soon as possible as the primary means for transporting humans to and from Earth orbit.


And this was a recent NY Times piece that was very disturbing; Shuttle’s End Leaves NASA a Pension Bill
www.nytimes.com... There is concern about paying pensions to the astronauts and the rest from this mission and so the President is trying to make sure these men and women still get their pensions. Wish anyone was trying this hard to keep pensions in the private sector but that is another story.

The shuttle program accounts for a vast majority of the business of United Space Alliance, originally a joint venture of Boeing and Lockheed Martin.


The pension fund now has about half the amount needed. The president’s budget proposal for the 2012 fiscal year requests $547.9 million for NASA to provide the rest. That is nearly 3 percent of the agency’s total budget and just about what the Science Mission Directorate at NASA spent last year on all grants and subsidies to study climate change, planetary systems and the origins of life in the universe.



At this link is a great video put together by the BBC and shows how sad it will be in spite of the fact it MUST be done away with. Enjoy! - Space shuttle: Community reflects on programme's end www.bbc.co.uk...


edit on 24-6-2011 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 





The sad reality is, unless we really come up with some actual artificial gravity system, we are basically tethered to earth. Every minute in zero G is damaging to the human body. Now the are actually thinking about reproduction in zero g, and if it would even work.


This is interesting and I think should be a challenge put to schools and nations and scientists all over the globe to discover either an artificial gravity system or a way to get around this dilemma. We hear a little about anti-gravity devices being invented but these are sort of closeted studies and blurry you tube videos and it does not seem science is at least openly even searching for a solution. Course maybe I don't travel in the same circles and they may be in fact working furiously on this right now but think we get better results when a challenge is offered and a world wide audience is included.

Maybe that should be the next hit prime time program...America Has Anti- gravity! And let people showcase how far they have gotten in this area. This way others can work off their ideas and we have a better chance for results. Crazy?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by mcrom901
 


mcrom, that was some fantastic research. Thanks for sharing. It didn't take an astronaut to figure out there was no way those panels could follow the capsule and that Buzz was...I guess doing some damage control to keep him on the payroll. But great work. Some people just don't want to believe and as the ole saying goes, "ignorance is bliss"



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 




post by newcovenant
I am actually well aware of those reasons and commented since it appeared you were against ending the program out of nostalgia (?)

You misunderstood my post , the shuttle has served its purpose , my frustration is that there is no viable next generation replacement ready to fill the gap .


post by newcovenant
perhaps a patriotic desire to see them remain in operation

No patriotic desire here mate ....I'm British our space program is practically nonexistent



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by gortex
.I'm British our space program is practically nonexistent


Well seems the Russians are going to help you with that...

Excalibur Almaz

www.excaliburalmaz.com...

Almaz is the old secret space station that flew at the time we started the secret astronaut program


Seems Isle of Man is making a bid to have a spaceport..


ICM Space organizes the registration of satellites with UK and Isle of Man Space Registries. It assists in securing orbital filing slots in conjunction with ManSat and the ITU and sources finance for satellite development and launch.

The Isle of Man has recently been named as the fifth in a list of nations most likely to make a moon landing between 2018 and 2020 by Ascend.


www.isleofman.com...



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Wirral Bagpuss
Is there a more covert reason why the Space Shuttle programme is being retired?


Sure... it is no longer needed






And don't forget the Air Force and Navy have their own now


Isnt that an image of the Black Knight Satellite??

I wouldnt want to be taken to space on the back of a satellite to be honest



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

Originally posted by maddog99
reply to post by darius2025
 


Buzz never said publicly he saw anything alien on the moon or anywhere. He did say a UFO followed Apollo 11...

No. He said that the adapter panels followed Apollo 11.


Perhaps I'm wrong on this but maybe he had a reason to change his story. So, we go from him saying that they didn't know what it was even after observing it through a telescope and watching it for hours to it being an adapter panel from the rocket. Even though the panel looks flat on on the model, as panels usually are, and he claimed it was L shaped prior to that. I'm so glad he found that out just in time for his Larry King appearance.
Especially since it was unknown for decades including at the time he made the first video. To commemorate the breakthrough he even wore the same suit. Maybe skeptics should be more skeptical of changed stories. I'm no genius but if everyone put as much time into unbiased debunking of things instead of being so one-sided we'd all be better off.

I wonder why everyone is waiting for an elementary level, official statement, from the U.S. government that there is something to the UFO/ET subject? That would mean they have been lying for over 60 years. I would imagine the American public wouldn't be too happy about that. Other governments and officials have demonstrated that they spend time, money, and resources investigating and maintaining records of events relating to UFO's. Ours has shown the same. Are all these military people, astronauts, police, and pilots posturing for the cameras?

Also, why does it seem that you have to be one of the aforementioned to be deemed credible? Regular people have been reliable enough to send people to death but not about what they have witnessed? Perhaps I should start ridiculing people who witness crimes because they aren't trained observers?
edit on 25-6-2011 by AvidWatcher because: correction



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
Isnt that an image of the Black Knight Satellite??


No, as discussed elsewhere, it's one of several views of tumbling shroud thingie dropped by an astronaut during a spacewalk, as discussed openly at the time and well documented subsequently.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by AvidWatcher
 

How do you know it was "unknown for decades"? Because the narrator of the video says so? The documentary was made in 2005. The interview of Aldrin is so heavily edited there's no way to tell what he actually had to say. The Larry King interview was live; no dubbing, no editing, no cutting. He got to tell the whole story.

From First Man by James Hansen, 2005.

The astronauts scratched their heads, At far closer than 6,000 miles, the object in sight cound not be the S-IVB, but rather one of the four panels that had enclosed the LM's launch garage.

Source

No, the adapter panels were not flat.



edit on 6/25/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
Just something to think about quickly as I'm scanning through this thread...

artificial gravity is pretty easy, it's called centrifugal force.

en.wikipedia.org...



Centrifugal force (from Latin centrum, meaning "center", and fugere, meaning "to flee") represents the effects of inertia that arise in connection with rotation and which are experienced as an outward force away from the center of rotation. In Newtonian mechanics, the term centrifugal force is used to refer to one of two distinct concepts: an inertial force (also called a "fictitious" force) observed in a non-inertial reference frame, and a reaction force corresponding to a centripetal force.

The term is also sometimes used in Lagrangian mechanics to describe certain terms in the generalized force that depend on the choice of generalized coordinates.

The concept of centrifugal force is applied in rotating devices such as centrifugal pumps, centrifugal governors, centrifugal clutches, centrifuges, etc., as well as in centrifugal railways, planetary orbits, banked curves, etc. These devices and situations can be analyzed either in terms of the fictitious force in the rotating coordinate system of the motion relative to a center, or in terms of the centripetal and reactive centrifugal forces seen from a non-rotating frame of reference; these different centrifugal forces are not equal in general.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


True the prior video was edited as it's a television show. But the statements he made didn't seem to be chopped up since as they were recording his face while he told the story for the most part. I guess they could be taken out of context but the fact that they couldn't identify a part of the rocket through a telescope is strange. Don't get me wrong, I have much respect for you as your observations usually seem to be on point but it seems to me that he may have had help with the revised story about it being panels, which aren't perfectly flat but aren't "L" shaped either.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Wirral Bagpuss
 
They are ancient aircraft. My grandfather designed the exhaust ports on those engines back in the early seventies. Don't worry, there are lots more toys off the books. They have other shuttles already operating, they just do not advertise them as much.

Here is the location of one in orbit right now.

www.n2yo.com...

AX

FTNWO



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
No, the adapter panels were not flat.


besides other things....


Aldrin: The first unusual thing that we saw I guess was 1 day out, or something, pretty close to the moon. It had a sizeable dimension to it, so we put the monocular on it.

Collins: How'd we see this thing? Did we just look out the window and there it was?

Aldrin: Yes, and we weren't sure but that it might be the S-IVB [Saturn Rocket Third Stage]. We called the ground and were told the S-IVB was 6000 miles away. We had a problem with the High Gain about this time, didn't we?

Collins: There was something. We felt a bump or maybe I just imagined it.

Armstrong: He was wondering whether the MESA [Modular Equipment Stowage Assembly] had come off.

Collins: I don't guess we felt anything.

Aldrin: Of course, we were seeing all sorts of little objects going by at the various dumps and then we happened to see this one brighter object going by. We couldn't think of anything else it could be other than the S-IVB. We looked at it through the monocular and it seemed to have a bit of an L-shape to it.

Armstrong: Like an open suitcase.



Aldrin: We were in PTC [Passive Thermal Control] at the time so each one of us had a chance to take a look at this and it certainly seemed to be within our vicinity and of a very sizeable dimension.

Armstrong: We should say that it was right at the limit of the resolution of the eye. It was very difficult to tell just what shape it was. And there was no way to tell the size without knowing the range or the range without knowing the size.

Aldrin: So then I got down in the LEB [Lower Equipment Bay] and started looking for it in the optics. We were grossly misled because with the sextant off-focus what we saw appeared to be cylinder.

Armstrong: Or really two rings.

Aldrin: Yes.

Armstrong: Two rings. Two connected rings.



Collins: No, it looked like a hollow cylinder to me. It didn't look like two connected rings. You could see this thing tumbling and, when it came around end-on, you could look right down in its guts. It was a hollow cylinder. But then you could change the focus on the sextant and it would be replaced by this open-book shape. It was really weird.

Aldrin: I guess there's not too much more to say about it other than it wasn't cylinder.

Collins: It was during the period when we thought it was a cylinder that we inquired about the S-IVB and we'd almost convinced ourselves that's what it had to be. But we don't have any more conclusions than that really. The fact that we didn't see it much past this one time period - we really don't have a conclusion as to what it might have been, how big it was, or how far away it was. It was something that wasn't part of the urine dump, we're pretty sure of that. Skipping ahead a bit, when we jettisoned the LM, you know we fired an explosive charge and got rid of the docking rings and the LM went boom. Pieces came off the LM. It could have been some Mylar or something that had somehow come loose from the LM.

Aldrin: We thought it could have been a panel, but it didn't appear to have that shape at all.



Collins: That's right, and for some reason, we thought it might have been a part of the High Gain Antenna. It might have been about the time we had high gain antenna problems. In the back of my mind, I have some reason to suspect that its origin was from the spacecraft.


history.nasa.gov...



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 06:32 AM
link   
Is it possible that nobody here realizes that telescopes around the world observed Apollo CSMs headed for the moon accompanied by the SLA panels? Here's the full story:

www.astr.ua.edu...



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 

Very few conspiracy theorists doubt that the CSM made it. The doubts all seem to surround whether Apollo could really land and return Humans while keeping them healthy.

Don't forget, we know the Russians had already sent probes. It just looks to me like they decided the cost would be too high to develop a manned lunar lander. They appear to have pretended to try to beat NASA to a manned landing to encourage a drain on US Dollars. I could be wrong, of Course.

What do you think, Jim? Do you think that Kennedy may have played into Soviet hands by wasting money on a space program that allowed the Russians to keep up in the arms race?



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


also check about the following.....


One, if not the most important, aspects of this observation is the crews description of the objects size. Both Armstrong and Aldrin explained the it was right near the resolution limit of the human eye so that it was not a point source but they just couldn't quite make out it's shape with the naked eye. This is important because we know the dimensions of an SLA panel (or S-IVB) and thus can calculate its rough distance based on different given observations of its angular size. Here the limit of resolution of the human eye is a great reference in that it is very easy to observe and is generally understood to be ~60 arc seconds or greater and given that Venus makes a great and familiar reference. So an SLA panel is around 21 ft in length it would aproach this resolution limit at a distance of around 13 to 14 miles (around 38 miles for the S-IVB). Any further distances and an SLA panel or S-IVB could not appear as anything but a point source which for both objects is in direct conflict with the specific observation that the crew made.

The conclusion must be that the crews observation must be incorrect if the observation was of an SLA panel or S-IVB! Otherwise these two objects really don't fit with the observation.


www.realityuncovered.net...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join