- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
– - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - –

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
– - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - –

the Orion will rotate like Apollo andI explain why in my second
article’s update:

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/027solarpanels.html

in the same update you can find the second version of my "Sails"
shaped solar panels for a ROTATING Orion

this new version has just FOUR moving parts (vs. 46 moving parts of
the Orion’s "Butterfly") to have the BEST reliability!

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
– - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - –

About the (current) Orion’s "butterfly" design, to-day I’ve seen a
NASA drawing of the Orion’s SM rear that shows the dimensions of the
rigid modules joined to the gimbals.

Well, its not 1/10th but 1/20th the wing’s circumference!

In other words, each wing has 20 hinges (not ten!) half of them on the
front side of the wing (visible in the Orion image published here) and
the second half in the rear (hidden) side of it!

Then, the two wings of the Orion’s "butterfly" have a total of 40
segments/slices and 40 hinges + six other moving-parts (the wing’s
locking systems and two x/z-axis gimbals) that (ALL) may FAIL, killing
a $10Bn moon mission since just ONE defective hinge could HINDE the
entire wing to deploy properly!

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
– - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - –

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
– - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - –

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
– - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - –

Christian Science – an oxymoron.

Christians – morons.

Why are these institutions allowed tax exempt status, and why are they
allowed to participate in government?

–
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html

As an aside , why do we ( the West) not propose that Iran be allowed – or
even helped – to go nuclear, as long as Thorium based technology only is
used?
If Iran adopts this idea, we could take her protestations of peaceful
intentions as sincere. She would even gain business and prestige as the
pioneer of a new technology of global importance, without having the
stranglehold that geographical possession of vast oil reserves now threatens
us with,. Honour and pride satisfied?
If she refuses, then we all, and especially the  ever watchful Chiefs of the
Israeli Air Force, know exactly where we/they  stand…on the road to
Megiddo.

Deal?

Thorium based nuclear power could, with present work, be declared feasible
within a few years of ongoing research – some reports say 2-3 years.With
resolution, a planning cycle could commence leading to mass construction  by
the early 2020s- we would then gain time for more definitive solutions such
as helium3 fusion and/or solar power satellites. Keep our rockets/space
technologies active advancing over the coming years, too.

We must drive home the lesson that, whatever is proven to be the final truth
about anthropogenic global warming, the answers do not lie in hair shirts,
hyper-regulation/taxation,  and global misanthropy, but in science,
technology, ingenuity and, above all, resolution!
Humanity usually fares best not by solving problems but by rendering them
irrelevant…

Michael Martin-Smith
From: "Aidan Karley" <name1_na…@email.provider.invalid>
Subject: Re: If all the Ice Sheets Melt?
Date: 18 May 2007 11:53

In article <1179355…@sheol.org>, Wayne Throop wrote:
> What keeps them from measuring isotpopic ratios and
> drawing the obvious conclusions?  And/or why aren’t
> such conclusions valid?

       There is some evidence from dendrochronology – there is
apparently a noticeable change in 14-C/13-C ratio in wood that grew
through the late 1800s and early 1900s, which is compatible with the
recorded changes in atmospheric CO2. (Fossil fuels have essentially a
zero content of 14-C ; soils and biologically-cycled carbon which has
been stored for less than ~60000 years will have noticeable 14-C ;
atmospheric carbon had a more-or less constant level of 14-C, dependent
on the intensity of cosmic and solar radiation.)
       Atmospheric 14-C levels spiked in the early 1950s as a
consequence of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, rendering carbon
dating unusable for anything that ‘closed’ after about 1950. Not that
it’s much use for periods of much less than a couple of centuries.

–
Aidan Karley, FGS,
Aberdeen, Scotland
A light wave is more like a crime wave than a water wave.

This is the company that is to rebuild our manned space
program.  Was Lockheed the better choice, or were
they just better connected?

Coast Guard’s Deepwater program blasted
By Maria Recio

Seattle Times
Nation and World
Sun May 20, 2007

WASHINGTON – When the Coast Guard’s first large cutter
in 35 years was christened in November at Northrop Grumman’s
Pascagoula, Miss., shipyard, it was a gleaming symbol of the
service’s ambitious $24 billion Deepwater program to update its
aging fleet.

Six months later, Deepwater is listing under a storm of congressional
criticism for design mistakes, cost overruns and lax oversight.
A botched program to lengthen existing patrol boats from 110 feet
to 123 feet has forced the Coast Guard to cancel the conversions
and scrap eight ships.

The Pascagoula-built National Security Cutter, at 418 feet the crown
jewel of the Deepwater program, is under scrutiny for metal fatigue
that critics say shortens its 30-year life to less than five years.

Four government audits have criticized management of the project,
which involves 91 new ships and 240 aircraft. Some of those vessels
would be based in Washington state waters.

"Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., calls the failed 110-foot conversion
program "the poster child" of what’s wrong with Deepwater.

"They stopped after ruining eight boats," said Taylor, a former
Coast Guard reservist who commanded patrol boats. "What angers
me is we have eight ruined boats, $100 million spent and no one
is held accountable. No one has been demoted."

The 13-foot section added to lengthen the ships ended up
causing the hull to buckle under the stress of rough waters."

The Coast Guard has responded to the hammering from lawmakers by
taking oversight of Deepwater from the contractor, Integrated Coast Guard
Systems (ICGS), a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and
Northrop Grumman; canceling the conversions; and making design
modifications to the National Security Cutter.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003714405_deepwate…

I am carrying out a short feasibility study regarding Jupiter’s moon
Io.  Io acts as an electrical generator as it moves through Jupiter’s
magnetic field, developing 400,000 volts across its diameter and
generating an electric current of 3 million amperes that flows along
the magnetic field to Io’s ionosphere.  Under these conditions is  it
at all possible to set up a comms link between a  spacecraft  orbiting
Io and  a disposable probe descending to the Io surface.

NASA sent the Galileo probe  to Jupiter and Io but I have not found
any detailed information regarding the comms links back to Earth or
the  link used when Galileo crashed on to the Jupiter
surface.

Many Thanks

Might not stop the hoaxers but would likely slow it down:)

Hey, where’s that weirdo Hoglan guy on this one?  If he can talk about
faces in rocks on Mars, what about this?  Even if it’s fake, they talk
about goofier things on that show.  It’s not like they’re going to
lose any credibility.  Maybe it is real so they won’t talk about it!

Spacecraft on the Moon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc7mkHtuLOs

xxx

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy/topics

–
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html

NASA seems BELIEVE that COTS companies will succeed (in their effort
to develop, build and launch low cost rockets and capsules) since has
already given them $500M of funds, has opened the doors of its
research centers, has included the COTS service in its flights
manifest and will soon allow the COTS companies (first SpaceX) to
launch their rockets from KSC, so… Why don’t MERGE (both) ESAS and
COTS vehicles (also) for moon missions?

my new idea/proposal here: http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/029aresX.html

.