IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
MSL "Heat shield woes"
djellison
post Feb 20 2008, 05:40 PM
Post #16


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14431
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



Oh dear. That's really very very bad news indeed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
centsworth_II
post Feb 20 2008, 06:10 PM
Post #17


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2173
Joined: 28-December 04
From: Florida, USA
Member No.: 132



Wouldn't it be ironic if MSL doesn't fly and ExoMars does?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ugordan
post Feb 20 2008, 06:13 PM
Post #18


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3648
Joined: 1-October 05
From: Croatia
Member No.: 523



Ironic, indeed. I don't think Alan will like that request one bit.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Feb 20 2008, 06:24 PM
Post #19


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14431
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



I really really really want to see MSL fly, but it pains me to say, Alan's in a situation where a painful decision may have to be taken.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elakdawalla
post Feb 20 2008, 06:25 PM
Post #20


Administrator
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 5172
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



Alan went on to say "The ramifications are going to be severe in the science division, but we are supporting MSL." He also said that the cost of delay to a 2010 or 2011 launch would be an additional $200M.

--Emily


--------------------
My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Sunspot_*
post Feb 20 2008, 07:15 PM
Post #21





Guests






QUOTE (elakdawalla @ Feb 20 2008, 06:25 PM) *
Alan went on to say "The ramifications are going to be severe in the science division, but we are supporting MSL.
--Emily


It's pointless sending it if it's to be stripped of most of it's scientific capability. It's hardly more than a long range MER even. now. huh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vjkane
post Feb 20 2008, 07:17 PM
Post #22


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 704
Joined: 22-April 05
Member No.: 351



Emily -

Are you at the MPEG meeting?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elakdawalla
post Feb 20 2008, 07:35 PM
Post #23


Administrator
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 5172
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



No. They're trying out allowing people to participate via WebEx -- you can see the slides on screen and call a toll-free number to hear the audio. I'm probably not going to tune in to much more of it today.

--Emily


--------------------
My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mariner9
post Feb 20 2008, 07:36 PM
Post #24


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 220
Joined: 13-October 05
Member No.: 528



I hate to be an armchair quarterback, so I'm not going to say even one tenth of the things that are running through my mind right now.

The cost overruns on MSL have already dug holes in other people's budgets, and it just keeps right on gobbling up money.

I admire the incredible things JPL has accomplished in the last 40 years, including the spectaculare sucess of the Mars Exploration Program, but JPL has allowed an 800 million dollar project to baloon into a 1.8 billion dollar project. And all of this after the hard lessons of Mars 98 were supposed to have instilled a sense of reality into project planning.


By the time this whole mess gets sorted out it will have done a lot of damage. I shudder to think what might end up happening to the Mars program. The Fiscal 2009 budget cuts may be just the begining.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elakdawalla
post Feb 20 2008, 07:53 PM
Post #25


Administrator
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 5172
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



One of the things that makes me a bit worried is that the Mars program might wind up eating other programs. For instance, Alan pointed out that priority given to Phoenix' launch imposed a $40 million charge to the Discovery program because of the delay of the Dawn launch, and he also brought up the possibility of opening up the New Frontiers line to Mars missions. The next New Frontiers mission will have to be inner solar system, no further out than Jupiter, because there's not enough plutonium left (he said) for anything in the outer solar system -- it'll have to be solar powered. There's already seven spacecraft scheduled to go to the Moon. That leaves small bodies and Venus in the original New Frontiers manifest. If they open it up to Mars, I wonder if that means New Frontiers will necessarily wind up at Mars because the risk of such a mission would definitely be lower than for a Venus mission.

--Emily


--------------------
My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ugordan
post Feb 20 2008, 07:56 PM
Post #26


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3648
Joined: 1-October 05
From: Croatia
Member No.: 523



QUOTE (elakdawalla @ Feb 20 2008, 08:53 PM) *
One of the things that makes me a bit worried is that the Mars program might wind up eating other programs.

I'm probably overly pessimistic, but what are the chances of this affecting the next outer planet flagship?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elakdawalla
post Feb 20 2008, 07:59 PM
Post #27


Administrator
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 5172
Joined: 4-August 05
From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth
Member No.: 454



I have no data with which to back this up, but my instinct is that as long as Alan is in charge, an outer planets flagship will move forward.

--Emily


--------------------
My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rlorenz
post Feb 20 2008, 09:45 PM
Post #28


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 609
Joined: 23-February 07
From: Occasionally in Columbia, MD
Member No.: 1764



QUOTE (ElkGroveDan @ Feb 18 2008, 11:36 AM) *
Ouch $115...but you can get a used one on Amazon for $105 rolleyes.gif.

Why can't you rocket scientists write in popular paperback? Also if you throw in a murder mystery and a love scene between discussions of thruster vectors, we can convince our other-halves that it's a worthwhile purchase.


I sympathize.

But this remark betrays a sad ignorance of the publishing industry. The rocket scientist authors have
exactly ZERO say in specifying the print run of the book or its sales price.

My experience with several different publishers (CUP on Lifting Titan's Veil and Planetary Landers;
Springer/Copernicus on Spinning Flight, Springer/Praxis on Space Systems Failures and Princeton
on Titan Unveiled) varies slightly in detail, but all
- take longer to publish than you want
- promote the book less than you want
- sell it at a higher price than you want

Planetary Landers is frustrating in that CUP have clearly priced it as a text, putting it out of the budget
of the space enthusiast.
Titan Unveiled, happily, looks like PUP has priced it to shift...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Feb 20 2008, 10:44 PM
Post #29


Founder
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14431
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



One thing that I think Jim Bell was pushing for with a book of his was an e-book version for a not-crazy fee. Obviously, publishers are publishers, and the little exposure I've had - they are a law unto themselves doing everything that seems illogical to both author and reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jim from NSF.com
post Feb 20 2008, 10:54 PM
Post #30


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734



QUOTE (elakdawalla @ Feb 20 2008, 02:53 PM) *
There's already seven spacecraft scheduled to go to the Moon. T


You mean proposed. There is only one mission past confirmation at this point
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th March 2024 - 02:25 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member.