| Author |
Message |
    
bruce
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 21, 2002 - 7:35 am: | 
|
Very intresting for all of us space nuts! These little space crafts are going strong after 25 years!
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020820/ts_nm/space_voyager_dc_2
|
Cuddlebear202
| | Posted on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 1:48 pm: |
|
Very Impressive.
Nice link Bruce. Thanks for the info. |
bruce
| | Posted on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 8:23 pm: |
|
I worked at Kenedy in 1982 got a neet photo of myself up 200 foot on pad 39b the one challenger took off from that was a neet job ! |
Spacecadet
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 9:18 am: |
|
The cool thing is that the two Voyagers xmit at about 100mw or 1/10 of a watt (I think)
WOW talk about DX and low power!!!
I worked on both of the launches so if anyone wants more info post here and I will try to answer. |
BIG FOOT
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 11:47 am: |
|
....shuttle question... if the NASA folks can fly the shuttle PIGGY BACK on top of a 747/757 from California back to Florida.. why can it not be done for TAKE- off...I know the shuttle would weigh more with fuel in the tanks, plus the weight of the crew and accessories.. but why can't the 747/757 go UP as high in the ionosphere and use some type of "bracket release" to release the shuttle.. let the 2 craft seperate a few miles, them fire up the shuttle engines to go on UP to circle the planet ? and let the 747/757 come back DOWN to earth ......Or is that too simple ?...BIG FOOT |
Taz
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 1:55 pm: |
|
I dont think the 757 could take all the weight/stress. Plus right after it released it the shuttle would have to fire its engines instantly which would probly turn the 757 into a big sky bomb(BLOW UP) and then cause the shuttle to blow. |
bruce
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 1:58 pm: |
|
they run about 5 watts but still when your about 803,521,200,000 miles away thats neet! |
BIG FOOT
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 2:46 pm: |
|
...TAZ...you did not read all of my post...scroll up and re-read..."let the 2 craft seperate a few miles ", the 747/757 could TURN to the left or to the right while UNDER the shuttle, which is where it started out at, or the shuttle could turn in the opposite direction, thereby putting MORE distance between them....also IF the shuttle rockets did NOT fire, they could safely land in either California or Florida, with NO re-entry problems from cutting through the atmosphere ( and sonic booms )....and the 747/757 could land at any ordinary airport like the normal plane it is.....BIG FOOT |
bruce
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 3:02 pm: |
|
Taz your too young to remember this but in the early days of fighter jets in the 50's all fighters still used 50 cal maching guns guided rockets were still a dream. Well one opened fire with his guns then hot-roded it... and you guessed it caught up with his own bullets becomming the first US fighter ever shot down by frendly fire his OWN. BY the way you shuttle idea would not work the full tank is much to large to fit on a plane. |
BIG FOOT
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 4:50 pm: |
|
...BRUCE...when the SHUTTLE is on the LAUNCH PAD, the 2 external tanks are only for getting the SHUTLE into the upper part of the atmosphere, then they fall off ( usually into the Atlantic Ocean, where they are recovered ( the leaking one was what blew up CHALLENGER back in the 1980 s remember )..so by putting the shuttle "piggy back " on top of the 747/757 like it is being taken across country back to Florida, you would not need the 2 EXTERNAL fuel tanks... just the jet engines of the 757 to get the craft up into the upper partsd of the atmosphere... then (somehow) un clamp the shuttle from the 747, the jet comes DOWN with a sharp turn to left or right and lands at a normal airport ( oh, oh security )... the SHUTTLE fires up the main engine in that time and continues on its trek to the ISS or satellite repair/retrieval, etc... oh yes, since there is NO passengers INSIDE the 747 plane, it can hold more FUEL to carry the extra weight of what ever is in the shuttle cargo bay , since it will take more fuel to take the extra weight of the shuttle on TOP of the 747....or is this too easy for scientists to conquer ??......BIG FOOT |
bruce
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 6:15 pm: |
|
bigfoot they have tried that on paper but the external full tank is nessary to get it high enough to make orbit since the solid rocket boosters fall away about 15 miles up and the main fuel is in in the tank NASA would love to be able to launch from a 747 but its not going to happen yet by the way if you would like to see the photo of me up on pad 39b e-mail me and ill send you a copy im the short one on the right |
Taz
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 9:33 pm: |
|
I still think its to much weight. Have you ever been to a launch bigfoot? You can feel the heat for at least 3-4 miles away. Concidering most is going into the ground, it would have to take a left turn or right rurn to not burst into flames.
Bruce, I knew that about aircraft catching up to its own gunfire. Thats why they dont put them on highspeed aircraft now a days. |
409
| | Posted on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 3:17 am: |
|
The Voyagers transmitters run at 25 watts according to NASA. Still a good trip !! |
Beaconman
| | Posted on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 8:10 am: |
|
WOW I was told by a NASA person that it was 100mw but still what DX that is!!!!! I wonder what kind of radio(brand name) they have aboard?? |
bruce
| | Posted on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 8:12 am: |
|
Is it that high? boy thoes RTG'S are realy getting a work out! Now if we could only get that bunny to catch up with it in 2020 and change them out we could go another 50 years.... nicads move over im goint to get a box of thoes things! |
bruce
| | Posted on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 2:48 pm: |
|
This is mind blowing but at 25 watts the transmitter is geting 32,140,848,000 MILES PER WATT Thats 1,285,634 TIMES around the earth!
WOW! |
Taz
| | Posted on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 10:48 pm: |
|
hahahahaha |
