....or at least build something cool?

The X Prize Foundation is asking the public to comment on the draft rules
set for its lunar lander challenge. According to draft rules for the lunar
lander contest, competitors will be challenged to build a vehicle capable of
launching vertically, travel a distance of 328 to 656 feet (100 to 200
meters) horizontally, and then land at a designated site. A return trip
would then occur between 5 minutes and 30 minutes later...Comments are
sought by March 1 with initial sign-ups slated for May 15, according to
draft rules, though Murphy added that the comment period could be extended
to 30 days."

He's always building something cool, to the moon? naw, not unless he pulls
anti-grav out of his hat.


"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> ...or at least build something cool?
>
> The X Prize Foundation is asking the public to comment on the draft rules
> set for its lunar lander challenge. According to draft rules for the lunar
> lander contest, competitors will be challenged to build a vehicle capable
> of launching vertically, travel a distance of 328 to 656 feet (100 to 200
> meters) horizontally, and then land at a designated site. A return trip
> would then occur between 5 minutes and 30 minutes later...Comments are
> sought by March 1 with initial sign-ups slated for May 15, according to
> draft rules, though Murphy added that the comment period could be extended
> to 30 days."
>

Give him a big enough budget and I have no doubt Burt could do nearly
anything he wanted. I know history has said that we should "go higher,
faster, farther" yet I hope one day we will change that. Instead I hope to
hear, "cheaper, safer, more available."

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote:

>...or at least build something cool?
>
>The X Prize Foundation is asking the public to comment on the draft rules
>set for its lunar lander challenge. According to draft rules for the lunar
>lander contest, competitors will be challenged to build a vehicle capable of
>launching vertically, travel a distance of 328 to 656 feet (100 to 200
>meters) horizontally, and then land at a designated site. A return trip
>would then occur between 5 minutes and 30 minutes later...Comments are
>sought by March 1 with initial sign-ups slated for May 15, according to
>draft rules, though Murphy added that the comment period could be extended
>to 30 days."

Heck, if those are all the rules, a mini-500 might even make it (30
minutes would allow time for any necessary frame rewelding after the
first flight).

Mark "yeah, I know...." Hickey

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> ...or at least build something cool?
>
> The X Prize Foundation is asking the public to comment on the draft rules
> set for its lunar lander challenge. According to draft rules for the lunar
> lander contest, competitors will be challenged to build a vehicle capable
> of launching vertically, travel a distance of 328 to 656 feet (100 to 200
> meters) horizontally, and then land at a designated site. A return trip
> would then occur between 5 minutes and 30 minutes later...Comments are
> sought by March 1 with initial sign-ups slated for May 15, according to
> draft rules, though Murphy added that the comment period could be extended
> to 30 days."
>

So, will this be known as the "Alice Prize"? ;^)

mark wrote:

> Give him a big enough budget and I have no doubt Burt could do nearly
> anything he wanted. I know history has said that we should "go higher,
> faster, farther" yet I hope one day we will change that. Instead I hope
> to hear, "cheaper, safer, more available."

Moon is easy ONCE YOU ARE OUT OF THE GRAVITY WELL. This needs to be done in
stages (pun intended). Crudely Burt has done a smaller scale of stage 1 & 2
of a Saturn. Too fast/too big a budget might be a problem (NASA involvement
would kill it), I can remember Vanguard on TV, Explorer worked.
--

regards

jc

LEGAL - I don't believe what I wrote and neither should you. Sobriety and/or
sanity of the author is not guaranteed

EMAIL - and are not valid email
addresses. news2x at perentie is valid for a while.

My "You'd Have to Be an Old Fart" prize goes to this one.

So... while the Lift Pixies were shaving off their Down Feathers with
Occam's Razor, Ralph Kramden, dizzy from all those bouncing air
molecules, was practicing his uppercut to send a privately-financed
craft into lunar orbit...

I think I'm finally getting this Aerieodynamics stuff.

Ken Finney wrote:

>
> So, will this be known as the "Alice Prize"? ;^)
>
>

Pow, Alice! To da moon!

http://www.honeymooners.net/ralph.htm

"As early as 1954 [Jackie Gleason] had the idea of freezing special
dieters' TV dinners with the exact number of calories printed on the
label. "

Speaking of things astronautical, I want to highly, HIGHLY recommend a new book:
"Riding Rockets: The Outrageous Tales of a Space Shuttle Astronaut" by Mike
Mullane. This is best depiction I've ever read on what it's like to ride and
work on the Space Shuttle. It's full of fascinating detail.

And, it's funnier than all get-out.

Ron Wanttaja

Stella Starr said:-

"As early as 1954 [Jackie Gleason] had the idea of freezing special
dieters' TV dinners with the exact number of calories printed on the
label. "


Way OT :-
You might like The Hacker's Diet http://www.fourmilab.com/
This is John Walker's (founder of Autodesk) web site.

I've got a radio-controlled helicopter that could snatch that prize easily, with those specifications.

Chris Wells wrote:
> I've got a radio-controlled helicopter that could snatch that prize
> easily, with those specifications.
>
>
> --
> Chris Wells

Yeah, Those rules need to tightened up considerably. Any Heli could
do it. I suspect he means "in an airless environment". But let's not
tell him. He leaves it that way, somone will be instantly rich as soon
as the rules are published.

Harry K

Chris Wells wrote:
I've got a radio-controlled helicopter that could snatch that prize
easily, with those specifications.


--
Chris Wells

Yeah, Those rules need to tightened up considerably. Any Heli could
do it. I suspect he means "in an airless environment". But let's not
tell him. He leaves it that way, somone will be instantly rich as soon
as the rules are published.

Harry K


Still doesn't seem too difficult. NASA already has all the pieces. I imagine there's a "trip to the moon" clause in there somewhere...

On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 16:02:44 +0000, Chris Wells
> wrote:

>> Yeah, Those rules need to tightened up considerably. Any Heli could
>> do it. I suspect he means "in an airless environment". But let's not
>> tell him. He leaves it that way, somone will be instantly rich as
>> soon as the rules are published.
>
>Still doesn't seem too difficult. NASA already has all the pieces.
>I imagine there's a "trip to the moon" clause in there somewhere...

The rules were on the web page, a couple of weeks back when this thread first
appeared. There was a prohibition (can't remember the exact wording) that would
prohibit any sort of aerodynamic lift.

Gotta say I'm not too fired up about this one. The world needs a simple,
low-cost way to orbit for manned vehicles...not a moon buggy.

Ron Wanttaja

Chris Wells wrote:

> I've got a radio-controlled helicopter that could snatch that prize
> easily, with those specifications.

Did any of you guys claiming that this is so trivial actually read the
rules? It explicitly states:

"3.2.18.1 Take-off vertically under only rocket power from Point A.
No aerodynamic or air-breathing methods of hovering, propulsion, or
landing are permitted except in the case of abort."

"3.2.18.7 Take-off vertically under only rocket power from Point B.
No aerodynamic or air-breathing methods of hovering, propulsion, or
landing are permitted except in the case of abort."

Unless you've got a rocket powered helicopter that doesn't use
aerodynamics for lift, you could snatch nothing easily.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2006

In article >,
Chris Wells > wrote:

> Harry K Wrote:
> > Chris Wells wrote:
> > I've got a radio-controlled helicopter that could snatch that prize
> > easily, with those specifications.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Chris Wells
> >
> > Yeah, Those rules need to tightened up considerably. Any Heli could
> > do it. I suspect he means "in an airless environment". But let's not
> > tell him. He leaves it that way, somone will be instantly rich as
> > soon
> > as the rules are published.
> >
> > Harry K
>
>
> Still doesn't seem too difficult. NASA already has all the pieces.
> I imagine there's a "trip to the moon" clause in there somewhere...

The only problem is: $$$$$$$. The cost to launch a Saturn V in 1969 was
$500M, not including the spacecraft and lander. Figure out the increase,
due to inflation and the R&D even to duplicate one today.

"Marc J. Zeitlin" > wrote in message
...
> Chris Wells wrote:
> "3.2.18.1 Take-off vertically under only rocket power from Point A. No
> aerodynamic or air-breathing methods of hovering, propulsion, or landing
> are permitted except in the case of abort."
>
> "3.2.18.7 Take-off vertically under only rocket power from Point B. No
> aerodynamic or air-breathing methods of hovering, propulsion, or landing
> are permitted except in the case of abort."
>
> Unless you've got a rocket powered helicopter that doesn't use
> aerodynamics for lift, you could snatch nothing easily.



Oh, thou dasher of dreams. (G)

Harold
KD5SAK

Marc J. Zeitlin wrote:
> Chris Wells wrote:
>
> > I've got a radio-controlled helicopter that could snatch that prize
> > easily, with those specifications.
>
> Did any of you guys claiming that this is so trivial actually read the
> rules? It explicitly states:
>
> "3.2.18.1 Take-off vertically under only rocket power from Point A.
> No aerodynamic or air-breathing methods of hovering, propulsion, or
> landing are permitted except in the case of abort."
>
> "3.2.18.7 Take-off vertically under only rocket power from Point B.
> No aerodynamic or air-breathing methods of hovering, propulsion, or
> landing are permitted except in the case of abort."
>
> Unless you've got a rocket powered helicopter that doesn't use
> aerodynamics for lift, you could snatch nothing easily.
>
> --
> Marc J. Zeitlin
> http://www.cozybuilders.org/
> Copyright (c) 2006

Well shucky darn. That means I can't take it with my antigravity
drive. It is all perfected, I only need to get that last magnet
adjusted just soooo..

Harry K

>>>>Did any of you guys claiming that this is so trivial actually read the
rules?

Actually, the link didn't work for me, I was only going by the statement in the OP. I was joking, as was the person who mentioned the Mini 500.