X-Prize is currently live on Discovery Science Channel [Archive]

Shiver Me Timbers

October 4th 04, 11:47 PM

> Corky Scott > wrote:

> This is the only forum Chuck has to defend his honor.
>
> Corky Scott

That may be Corky but tell us why he has to hijack a thread like the
one he did today and try to change it's direction just because of his
personal battle with Zoom and Juan.

I heartily congratulate the American team led by Burt Rutan and piloted
by Mr Melville on their historic accomplishments..... so tell me why
can't Chuck do the same just for once and after that just keep his
mouth shut.

Don't you think that Burt Rutan and his whole team deserve that small
courtesy from the flying community in this newsgroup.... on this
historic day...???????

For someone with as much history and experience in aviation that Chuck
supposedly has, it seems that about the only time he comes into this
group is when he feels the need to blow his nose on his favourite and
only subject of interest. He doesn't normally offer flying stories,
tips on construction, congratulate others in this group for their
accomplishments. He doesn't get into discussions with the group
regulars on those types of subjects, instead he starts more threads on
Zoom and Juan than everyone else in this group combined.

A GOOGLE search for this group on the word Zoom shows 6960 returns.

Thats Zoom..... not ZZoom or Zooooom or Zooooomy or any other type of
derivative. Nor is it Juan or Yawn or any derivative of that either.

Right now on my newserver there are 6 active threads on Zoom and Juan
so tell me Corky isn't six ongoing threads enough for Chuck to defend
his honour.

There is an active thread about Spaceship one.... 153 comments from the
regulars in this group, and yet the first comment from Chuck took it
off topic and into the land of Zoom and Juan. He couldn't even leave
that one alone.

Corky when is enough on the subject actually enough on the subject.

Corky you mentioned Zoom taking Chuck to task on his ANN website
and how Chuck needs to come here to defend his honour.

WHY HERE.????????

Do you think that everyone in this group also follows ANN's website,
and do you think that everyone who reads ANN's website follows this
newsgroup.

And if they do follow this newsgroup, do you think it's to stay
informed about Chuck's personal ongoing battles with Zoom, or do you
think it's because ( like me ) they have a general interest in
homebuilt aircraft, and enjoy stories about people and from people who
are actually flying, or building their own airplane, and just enjoy the
general conviviality of people like yourself who share their interest
in aviation.

Roger Halstead

October 5th 04, 12:05 AM

On 4 Oct 2004 13:18:02 -0700, (bryan chaisone)
wrote:

>Roger that Roger. Sorry, couldn't help myself. All excited for
>Burt's team. He's got a bunch of great guys working with him. Wish I
>was one of them.
>
People were getting choked up all over the place including the two
watching from our place<:-))

To me this was more momentous than the original Mercury flights and
the whole project probably cost less than one of those capsules.

Although most would not consider a $20 million project grass roots it
was exactly that. Carbon fiber and resin lay-ups that were easily
fixable. Think what would have happened in NASA had they broken the
gear off.

The flight of SpaceShipOne is the opening of the door to space flight
for industry and the world in a way that could never be approached by
the governments of the world.

To me it now makes going to the other planets much more of a
possibility but how long before "Protect the Planets" groups emerge?

I say it's a fantastic job well done!

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>Bryan "was Monk" Chaisone
>
>Roger Halstead > wrote in message >...
>> If you get the Discovery Science channel, it's pretty good coverage
>> with lots of history.
>>
>> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>> www.rogerhalstead.com

Roger Halstead

October 5th 04, 12:26 AM

On 4 Oct 2004 11:42:09 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:

>In article t>, Dave S says...
>>
>>CNN has it too.. and the word is 368K feet.. they made it.
>
>I've been watching the live broadcast on Science channel and the room was full
>of reporters and photographers and no sign of zoom. I figured he'd be right up
>there with the rest of the cameras in the first row.

You mean that cute Reporter with the British accent wasn't him in
drag...er... disguise?

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>The speakers never said a
>special thanks to zoom or anything about him .Even Richard Branson was about 3
>rows back .I thought when one had a special position like jaun said zoomy had ,
>that he'd be right up front.I bet he wasn't even there LOL!!!
>
>Chuck (I got the truck title)S RAH-14/1 ret

Dave Hyde

October 5th 04, 01:27 AM

Roger Halstead wrote...

> I say it's a fantastic job well done!

Hear hear!

Dave 'green' Hyde

Ron Wanttaja

October 5th 04, 05:15 AM

On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 22:47:13 GMT, Shiver Me Timbers >
wrote:

>> Corky Scott > wrote:
>
>> This is the only forum Chuck has to defend his honor.
>>
>> Corky Scott
>
>That may be Corky but tell us why he has to hijack a thread like the
>one he did today and try to change it's direction just because of his
>personal battle with Zoom and Juan.

I, too, dislike postings whose subject lines don't reflect the content of
the posting. When I respond to them, I generally change the subject line
appropriately.

There are those who don't like to view any of the postings regarding Zoom.
It's common courtesy to put "Zoom" or "zzz" (a RAH convention) in the
Subject line to assist those who use killfiles to avoid these topics. I'd
be obliged if you do so in the future.

You don't want to read postings about Chuck, Juan, and Zoom, but you
apparently like to make them. In the future, please include "Zoom" or
"zzz" in the subject line to assist those who use filters.

>A GOOGLE search for this group on the word Zoom shows 6960 returns.
>
>Thats Zoom..... not ZZoom or Zooooom or Zooooomy or any other type of
>derivative. Nor is it Juan or Yawn or any derivative of that either.

It may surprise you, but Mr. Campbell is a controversial subject. For that
reason, he generates a lot of discussion.

Many of those 6960 returns are probably RESPONSES to people who post
messages saying "quit talking about Zoom." You don't put a fire out by
dumping more fuel on it.

>Corky when is enough on the subject actually enough on the subject.
>
>Corky you mentioned Zoom taking Chuck to task on his ANN website
>and how Chuck needs to come here to defend his honour.
>
>WHY HERE.????????

Then, where else? USENET is unique; it is the only uncensorable forum.
Mailing lists and forum pages can be shut down by legal action or threat of
it. Because of the way USENET works, everyone has access and no one can
silence any other individual. And because of Deja...ummm, Google, past
messages are available for reference.

The other advantage of USENET is that modern newsreaders give users great
flexibility to select what they read and what subject they aren't
interested in. If you use "Zoom" and "zzz" as part of a subject line
filter, and add, oh, a half-dozen email addresses to a killfile, you'll see
hardly any messages about Zoom.

USENET is anarchy. It always *has* been anarchy. It's one of its biggest
weeknesses...and its biggest strength. If you put "Zoom", "zzz", and about
a half-dozen names into a killfile, you'll see very few postings on
Campbell. I've been on the groups for twenty years, and I've seen
countless attempts to shut people up by trying to "shame" them. It *never*
works; it always makes the situation worse.

>And if they do follow this newsgroup, do you think it's to stay
>informed about Chuck's personal ongoing battles with Zoom, or do you
>think it's because ( like me ) they have a general interest in
>homebuilt aircraft, and enjoy stories about people and from people who
>are actually flying, or building their own airplane, and just enjoy the
>general conviviality of people like yourself who share their interest
>in aviation.

Why are you taking your personal beef with Corky and Chuck public? Why not
email them and express your displeasure? Do you think people read this
newsgroup to watch your battles with Chuck and Corky?

Old Klingon proverb: "If you do not want something said, then do not say
it."

If you want people to talk about aviation...why don't you talk about
aviation?

So, Shiver, what are you building? If you're not building, what are you
thinking of building? If you're not planning on building, what's your
favorite homebuilt? Why? What kind of "mission" do you have and what kind
of planes do you think will meet them? What kind of panel would you
install? What do you feel about the longevity of the various materials?
How do the homebuilding rules in your country differ from those in the US?

Ron Wanttaja

Del Rawlins

October 5th 04, 05:20 AM

On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 22:47:13 GMT, Shiver Me Timbers
> wrote:

>Corky you mentioned Zoom taking Chuck to task on his ANN website
>and how Chuck needs to come here to defend his honour.
>
>WHY HERE.????????
>
>Do you think that everyone in this group also follows ANN's website,
>and do you think that everyone who reads ANN's website follows this
>newsgroup.

"Shiver": I've snipped most of your comments because I simply am not
interested in addressing them point by point as others will no doubt
do, but I have to say that based upon your comments today you have
very little understanding of the nature of Chuck's problems with Zoom.
In saying that Zoom has been "taking Chuck to task" you indicate that
in your opinion that Zoom's accusations have a degree of merit which
even a casual investigation of the facts will show to be lacking.

Zoom has made a habit of defaming Chuck in his various publications
through the use of innuendo, half truths, and outright fabrication for
several years now. His reasons for doing so have been discussed here
many times in the past and aren't really relevant to this discussion.
The simple answer to your question of "WHY HERE?" is that this is the
best (and originally, the only) forum available for Chuck to respond.

Chuck can't respond on the ANN site because Zoom controls the content
of that site and any discussion forums associated with it, and will
delete any comments which he doesn't like or which may undermine his
position. If Chuck wants to get his side of the story out, he has no
choice but to post it in other aviation forums. Posting to the thread
in question in particular is more than appropriate because Zoom/Juan
have claimed to have some sort of exlusive media arrangement related
to the SS1 flights.

Others will probably post the opinion that you are simply the latest
in a series of Zoom sock puppets to post here, but since you are
relatively new to this newsgroup and have made posts on other topics I
am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. Before posting on this
topic again I would suggest you do some research by visiting the Zoom
FAQ site and learning more about the history of this dispute:

http://www.ousterhout.net/zoom.html

Finally, you should understand that this is an unmoderated newsgroup
and the regular posters here like it that way for the most part. In
the past, efforts at enforcing content restrictions have met with a
lot of disapproval. If you do not approve of the way things are done
here, you are of course free to go elsewhere.

================================================== ==
Del Rawlins--
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply

Shiver Me Timbers

October 5th 04, 05:46 AM

> Del Rawlins > wrote:

> Zoom has made a habit of defaming Chuck in his various publications
> through the use of innuendo, half truths, and outright fabrication for
> several years now.

I am not arguing that point at all. The fact is that everyone in this
group including general lurkers like me are very well aware of the
facts surrounding Chuck Zoom and Juan.

My point is simple. Considering the historical importance of what took
place today and the fact that the thread in question was to allow the
regulars here to congratulate and give accolades to Burt Rutan and his
team, why would Chuck decide that he just had to somehow interject
the Zoom and Juan factor into the equation instead of just coming in
like everyone else, congratulating Burt as he richly deserved, and just
shutting the **** up about his personal and ongoing problems with Zoom.

It's not as if he couldn't start another Zoom thread or just add his
comments to an existing thread, there are six current ongoing
threads on Zoom and Juan right now.

This isn't Chuck's day, nor Zooms nor Juans..... It's Burt Rutans day
and those directly involved in the fantastic accomplishment that took
place today in outer space. There's that old saying of knowing when to
hold them and when to fold them, and in my humble opinion today Chuck
showed no more intelligence or comman sense than Zoom does in deciding
when and where to blow his nose.

And since I like to think that I know when to hold them and when
to fold them, this is me saying that I have made my point and if
someone wants to spit at me for pointing out the obvious then
folks help yourselves.

Shiver Me Timbers

October 5th 04, 06:03 AM

> Ron Wanttaja > wrote:

> So, Shiver, what are you building? If you're not building, what are you
> thinking of building? If you're not planning on building, what's your
> favorite homebuilt? Why? What kind of "mission" do you have and what kind
> of planes do you think will meet them? What kind of panel would you
> install? What do you feel about the longevity of the various materials?
> How do the homebuilding rules in your country differ from those in the US?
>
> Ron Wanttaja

Well Ron my days of building are pretty much over.

Like many armchair pilots and lurkers I enjoy the general discussion
aviation in general, particularily homebuilding.

Now if I was in a position to actually build a plane, considering I
live in Canada with lots of lakes and rivers I would look at some sort
of amphibian as my first choice... like a Coot perhaps, or else
something like a Bearhawk on floats or amphibs.

Now my curious question back... and perhaps Del could take a shot at
this considering where he lives and the fog and weather that he would
encounter in some of the coastal and inland regions.

How about a FLIR installed. Pointing forwards obviously.

Cost aside.... What sort of benefit could a pilot get from being able
to see what's ahead of them by having a FLIR display in the cockpit.

The more I watch these cop shows with the eye in the sky clearly
showing the bad guy, cars, streets, buildings, etc., the more I wonder
if and when something like that is going to be available in the cockpit
of both commercial and general aviation planes.

Del (or anyone) what if you had to fly between to large hills, down a
fiord, low in foggy weather with a radio tower nearby, blah blah blah.

Could a FLIR system show a radio tower with guy wires ahead of you on a
dark and foggy night, or in a snow storm or thunder storm.

Are these systems available, because I can see a day when they will be
available in cars. Imaging coming across a foggy patch of road and
flipping on the old FLIR system to see where the curve in the road is
or whether there's a bunch of cars piling up in front of you.

Ron Wanttaja

October 5th 04, 07:07 AM

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 05:03:48 GMT, Shiver Me Timbers >
wrote:

>Like many armchair pilots and lurkers I enjoy the general discussion
>aviation in general, particularily homebuilding.
>
>Now if I was in a position to actually build a plane, considering I
>live in Canada with lots of lakes and rivers I would look at some sort
>of amphibian as my first choice... like a Coot perhaps, or else
>something like a Bearhawk on floats or amphibs.

Well, knowing this newsgroup, I know you'll get at least one response about
the Bearhawk. :-)

>Now my curious question back... and perhaps Del could take a shot at
>this considering where he lives and the fog and weather that he would
>encounter in some of the coastal and inland regions.
>
>How about a FLIR installed. Pointing forwards obviously.
>
>Cost aside.... What sort of benefit could a pilot get from being able
>to see what's ahead of them by having a FLIR display in the cockpit.

[SNIP]

>Are these systems available, because I can see a day when they will be
>available in cars. Imaging coming across a foggy patch of road and
>flipping on the old FLIR system to see where the curve in the road is
>or whether there's a bunch of cars piling up in front of you.

Didn't Cadillac or someone have a low-light vision system a few years back?
ISTR a commercial showing a couple of deer crossing a heads-up type
display.

FLIR would certainly make an interesting accessory to some types of planes,
especially bush airplanes. It almost certainly would have to be a HUD-type
display, I think....seems like it's be awkward switching from a
panel-mounted display to the windshield during approach. It's one thing
when you've got a co-pilot trained in operating both the aircraft and the
FLIR; it's another when your co-pilot is a half-asleep tourist. Might be
better to have a military-style NVG mounted on your headset.

I've never used FLIRs or other night-vision equipment, but one system's
specs (SPI T14) looks like they're pretty low resolution. Don't know how
well they'd work showing a set of power lines at low altitude and ~100
knots. But I expect the military is trained to do it...

Ron Wanttaja

Del Rawlins

October 5th 04, 10:19 AM

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 06:07:41 GMT, Ron Wanttaja >
wrote:

>On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 05:03:48 GMT, Shiver Me Timbers >
>wrote:

>Well, knowing this newsgroup, I know you'll get at least one response about
>the Bearhawk. :-)
>
>>Now my curious question back... and perhaps Del could take a shot at
>>this considering where he lives and the fog and weather that he would
>>encounter in some of the coastal and inland regions.
>>
>>How about a FLIR installed. Pointing forwards obviously.
>>
>>Cost aside.... What sort of benefit could a pilot get from being able
>>to see what's ahead of them by having a FLIR display in the cockpit.

Responding to Ron's post rather than directly to try to keep this
contained in one thread....

The bottom line for me:

1) I am low time and don't have any business ****ing around in the
weather.

2) I don't need to fly anywhere bad enough that I will consider
****ing around in the weather. People who fly in Alaska recognize
that sometimes you get stuck out in BFE waiting for weather to pass
and plan accordingly (or they should).

3) Up here, if you are flying around in the weather, chances are you
are in icing conditions. No Thank You....

4) Weight. All of that extra equipment that I won't be using for the
above reasons cuts into my useful load of people, gear, fuel, ammo,
and dead animal flesh.

From a practical standpoint, I am planning to install an electric
attitude indicator and some sort of moving map GPS as emergency
equipment in case the weather closes in around me in a situation where
there is no good place to land and wait it out.

================================================== ==
Del Rawlins--
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply

Matt Whiting

October 5th 04, 11:49 AM

Shiver Me Timbers wrote:

>>Ron Wanttaja > wrote:
>
>
>
>>So, Shiver, what are you building? If you're not building, what are you
>>thinking of building? If you're not planning on building, what's your
>>favorite homebuilt? Why? What kind of "mission" do you have and what kind
>>of planes do you think will meet them? What kind of panel would you
>>install? What do you feel about the longevity of the various materials?
>>How do the homebuilding rules in your country differ from those in the US?
>>
>>Ron Wanttaja
>
>
> Well Ron my days of building are pretty much over.

I think we'd all pretty much figured this out...

Matt

ChuckSlusarczyk

October 5th 04, 01:08 PM

In article >, Shiver Me Timbers says...

>My point is simple. Considering the historical importance of what took
>place today and the fact that the thread in question was to allow the
>regulars here to congratulate and give accolades to Burt Rutan and his
>team, why would Chuck decide that he just had to somehow interject
>the Zoom and Juan factor into the equation instead of just coming in
>like everyone else, congratulating Burt as he richly deserved, and just
>shutting the **** up about his personal and ongoing problems with Zoom.

Mr Shiver
I don't think you did your homework before you decided to chime in. You said I
didn't congratulate Rutan for the SS1.Here's one of the posts I put up the other
day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In article >, Richard Lamb says...
>
>Absolutely breath taking flight!
>
>I caught it real time on CNN (surprise)
>
>That Miles character sure can talk alot!

Sure was . Usually famous people are famous because of doing something really
great. Rutan has done 2 great things with the prospect of even more. I never
thought he could top the round the world flight but he sure did ...in spades!!
Hats off to him and all his crew.

Chuck S

__________________________________________________ ______________________________

There were a couple more but point made.I also wrote to the Rutan web site to
offer my congratulations. So if your going to criticize please get your facts
correct before making accusations. That's the same problem I have with zoom and
jaun.

>This isn't Chuck's day, nor Zooms nor Juans..... It's Burt Rutans day
>and those directly involved in the fantastic accomplishment that took
>place today in outer space. There's that old saying of knowing when to
>hold them and when to fold them, and in my humble opinion today Chuck
>showed no more intelligence or comman sense than Zoom does in deciding
>when and where to blow his nose.

zoom and jaun made it an issue when they bragged about his deep involvement with
the program and zoom being the pool reporter. I was merely commenting on the
fact that zoom was nowhere in sight. If this detracted from Burt's Day then I'm
getting a lot more credit then I deserve and besides Rutan has nothing to do
with me and zoom.

>
>And since I like to think that I know when to hold them and when
>to fold them, this is me saying that I have made my point and if
>someone wants to spit at me for pointing out the obvious then
>folks help yourselves.

Seems like you starting spitting first and as far as pointing out the obvious.It
would seem obvious that you have an agenda, I've "never"
seen you point out the obvious when the author was jaun or zoom but you sure
jumped out at me. Hmmmm

Have a nice day
Chuck RAH-14/1 ret

Corky Scott

October 5th 04, 01:16 PM

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 05:03:48 GMT, Shiver Me Timbers
> wrote:

>Now my curious question back... and perhaps Del could take a shot at
>this considering where he lives and the fog and weather that he would
>encounter in some of the coastal and inland regions.
>
>How about a FLIR installed. Pointing forwards obviously.
>
>Cost aside.... What sort of benefit could a pilot get from being able
>to see what's ahead of them by having a FLIR display in the cockpit.

Don't know if you've been reading the trade magazines Shiver, but a
kind of forward looking viewing process has been developed with Alaska
as the testing area.

It's essentially a very expensive two part large screen GPS display.
It shows, in color, the terrain in a forward level 3D view as well as
a moving map display, also in color.

My understanding is that the terrain information is extremely
accurate, as it has to be, and the definition of the forward looking
display has to be seen to be believed. It appears you could literally
fly up a canyon in dense fog, or let down through a cloud canopy to a
landing strip surrounded by mountains with no danger, as you can see
via the screen as if it were a cloudless day.

The rub? It costs upwards to $80,000 per installation.

The neat thing about this kind of display is that it does not require
a radar or infra red scope to be installed out on the wing for it to
function. A GPS antenna, or several, is all that is needed. That,
panel space and lots of money that is. And also the guts to attempt
to fly in zero zero conditions and trust the screens.

See: http://www.cheltonflightsystems.com/features.htm

Corky Scott

ChuckSlusarczyk

October 5th 04, 01:21 PM

In article >, Roger Halstead says...

>Although most would not consider a $20 million project grass roots it
>was exactly that. Carbon fiber and resin lay-ups that were easily
>fixable. Think what would have happened in NASA had they broken the
>gear off.

First there would have to be a board of inquiry and meetings to discuss the gear
breaking .Then a survey would be done to get opinions of why it broke, next the
design teams would come up with a fix .Then Congress would investigate and try
to place blame on somebody. Next Rev Al would show up yelling that the program
is racist because the entire machine is white. Bids would be let out ,a
committee would study the bids,The fiscial division would let a contract and the
gear would be replaced. That is after OSHA ,EPA and the rest inspected the
landing site to check for danger to wildlife. Total time for the project 1 1/2
years. Rutan and crew one week .

>
>The flight of SpaceShipOne is the opening of the door to space flight
>for industry and the world in a way that could never be approached by
>the governments of the world.

You got that right .When did Government ever do anything better then the private
sector? Perhaps with the exception of wars?

>
>To me it now makes going to the other planets much more of a
>possibility but how long before "Protect the Planets" groups emerge?

Don't worry they will if there are tree huggers it won't be long before the
first "planet huggers" show up :-)

>
>I say it's a fantastic job well done!

So say us all!!

Chuck (former NASA geek) S
>

Ron Wanttaja

October 5th 04, 03:39 PM

On 5 Oct 2004 05:21:06 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:

>>The flight of SpaceShipOne is the opening of the door to space flight
>>for industry and the world in a way that could never be approached by
>>the governments of the world.
>
>You got that right .When did Government ever do anything better then the private
>sector?

Any operation driven by the desire for knowledge, not profit. SS1 was
different; it was enabled by the personal fortune of Paul Allen, who tends
to spend it on stuff like professional ball teams and goofy-looking
museums.

Jay Leno had a good line about this, last night: "They just won the $10
million X-Prize, but the spacecraft cost them $25 million to build. Guess
there weren't any rocket scientists on that team...." :-)

If space development had depended on the whims of billionaires, space
flight would probably still be a dream. When a billionaire's personal will
is missing, the government is really the only alternative.

My guess is that no spacecraft showed a profit until communications
satellites could be deployed into geosynchronous orbit. And it took a lot
of government-funded development to enable that kind of operation.

The government *is* getting better. They're doing a lot of funding without
demanding the level of oversight they previously had. The Mars Rovers were
an example of this sort of approach.

I taped CNN's post-landing coverage and watched it last night. Dr.
Diamandis is arranging additional money to encourage the other X-prize
entrants to keep going. He says there's going to be a big Fly-Off in
Arizona in 2006; they're going to bring all the contestants together and
spend a week launching their vehicles. THAT'S going to be fun to watch.

Ron Wanttaja

Corky Scott

October 5th 04, 04:12 PM

On 5 Oct 2004 05:21:06 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:

>>I say it's a fantastic job well done!
>
>So say us all!!
>
>Chuck (former NASA geek) S

It was a great feat, done in typically inventive Rutan fashion. I'm
just having a hard time imagining how it could be of any possible use
to anyone besides Burt Rutan and Richard Branson. Is this to be the
near space equivalent of a carnival thrill ride, albeit a hideously
expensive and extremely dangerous one?

I really do see this as an impressive engineering demonstration, it
just seems so, I don't know, useless. It's like spending millions to
develop a car that can go 2,000 miles per hour. What do you do with
it? Where can you drive it?

Corky Scott

Shiver Me Timbers

October 5th 04, 07:44 PM

> ChuckSlusarczyk > wrote:

> So if your going to criticize please get your facts correct before making
> accusations. That's the same problem I have with zoom and jaun.

TO THE GROUP ------> Correct me if I am wrong.

According to the time stamps that I see on Chuck's postings in the
thread in question, his first posting was at 12.42 where he introduced
the Zoom and Juan factor into a thread congratulating Burt Rutan's
accomplishment, and Chuck's congratulatory post to Burt and the gang
did not take place until 2.02 Pm..... one hour and twenty minutes
later.

Chuck.... Those time stamps speak for themselves and I do believe I
have my facts correct.

> Seems like you starting spitting first and as far as pointing out the
> obvious.It would seem obvious that you have an agenda, I've "never"
> seen you point out the obvious when the author was jaun or zoom but you sure
> jumped out at me. Hmmmm

Since I have no axe to grind in the continuing saga of you, Zoom,
and Juan, you will never find me putting my two cents into those
discussions.

But Chuck the thread in question was not about you, Zoom, or Juan,
it was about Burt Rutan and his historical accomplishment that day,
and for whatever reason you just couldn't and wouldn't pass by the
opportunity to introduce the Zoom factor and blow your nose.

And my question to you is why did you feel it necessary to detract from
Burt's accomplishments just so you could advance your own personal
agenda....??????

It's not as if you couldn't have started up a new thread with a
different subject line, like you have done dozens of times in the past.

Richard Isakson

October 5th 04, 08:04 PM

"Shiver Me Timbers" wrote ...
> But Chuck the thread in question was not about you, Zoom, or Juan,
> it was about Burt Rutan and his historical accomplishment that day,

"Historical" is probably a good discription. The technology used yesterday
was fifty years old. The only real question was why it took twenty five
million dollars of someone elses money to do it.

On top of that, the reentry system was just about as dorky as you can get.
Do you understand that if they go much higher that system won't work? Of
course, even the X15 couldn't go much higher than it went because of reentry
problems. Above 100 km its all free fall and that means higher reentry
speeds and that means a different reentry method.

Rich

B2431

October 5th 04, 08:48 PM

>From: Roger Halstead
>Date: 10/4/2004 18:26 Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>On 4 Oct 2004 11:42:09 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:
>
>>In article t>, Dave S
>says...
>>>
>>>CNN has it too.. and the word is 368K feet.. they made it.
>>
>>I've been watching the live broadcast on Science channel and the room was
>full
>>of reporters and photographers and no sign of zoom. I figured he'd be right
>up
>>there with the rest of the cameras in the first row.
>
>You mean that cute Reporter with the British accent wasn't him in
>drag...er... disguise?
>
>Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>

That was Ron, ain't he the cutest?

Getting even with Ron for puns worse than mine;

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

B2431

October 5th 04, 08:53 PM

>Date: 10/5/2004 10:12 Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>On 5 Oct 2004 05:21:06 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:
>
>>>I say it's a fantastic job well done!
>>
>>So say us all!!
>>
>>Chuck (former NASA geek) S
>
>It was a great feat, done in typically inventive Rutan fashion. I'm
>just having a hard time imagining how it could be of any possible use
>to anyone besides Burt Rutan and Richard Branson. Is this to be the
>near space equivalent of a carnival thrill ride, albeit a hideously
>expensive and extremely dangerous one?
>
>I really do see this as an impressive engineering demonstration, it
>just seems so, I don't know, useless. It's like spending millions to
>develop a car that can go 2,000 miles per hour. What do you do with
>it? Where can you drive it?
>
>Corky Scott

If the prices come down enough I could see this as an
inercontinental/transcontinental business jet application.

Dan, U.S Air Force, retired

Roger Halstead

October 5th 04, 10:38 PM

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 11:12:43 -0400, Corky Scott
> wrote:

>On 5 Oct 2004 05:21:06 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:
>
>>>I say it's a fantastic job well done!
>>
>>So say us all!!
>>
>>Chuck (former NASA geek) S
>
>It was a great feat, done in typically inventive Rutan fashion. I'm
>just having a hard time imagining how it could be of any possible use
>to anyone besides Burt Rutan and Richard Branson. Is this to be the
>near space equivalent of a carnival thrill ride, albeit a hideously
>expensive and extremely dangerous one?
>
>I really do see this as an impressive engineering demonstration, it
>just seems so, I don't know, useless. It's like spending millions to
>develop a car that can go 2,000 miles per hour. What do you do with
>it? Where can you drive it?
>

The media keep playing this up as opening the door for Tourists, but
it's really a "first step" toward a much less expensive way to get
into space commercially. Only the future knows how far this approach
will be capable of going.

They are only making it to sub orbit at present and to go much
farther, or higher, means a faster re-entry speed and a lot more heat.
The feathering technique is only going to work to a point so they are
eventually going to have to work on more advanced methods of heat
control on re-entry.

Different materials for the outside of the craft, different and
innovative ablative techniques may be just around the corner. Already
there is, or has been some work done on using liquid (water) instead
of the tile used by the shuttle. It's kind of a "weeping wing"
approach that might allow much less expensive materials to be used for
high speed re-entry from high altitude.

Safe space flight, be it NASA or commercial is probably a long way
off.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>Corky Scott

Robert Bonomi

October 5th 04, 11:01 PM

In article >,
Shiver Me Timbers > wrote:
>
[[.. munch ..]]
>
>Cost aside.... What sort of benefit could a pilot get from being able
>to see what's ahead of them by having a FLIR display in the cockpit.
>
>The more I watch these cop shows with the eye in the sky clearly
>showing the bad guy, cars, streets, buildings, etc., the more I wonder
>if and when something like that is going to be available in the cockpit
>of both commercial and general aviation planes.
>
>Del (or anyone) what if you had to fly between to large hills, down a
>fiord, low in foggy weather with a radio tower nearby, blah blah blah.
>
>Could a FLIR system show a radio tower with guy wires ahead of you on a
>dark and foggy night, or in a snow storm or thunder storm.

*VERY* poorly, if at all.

You've either got to have a 'hot' source (relative to the background),
or you have to 'light' the scene with IR, to see things.

If you can't see the visible beacons on the tower, you're not likely to
be able to see it on IR, either. sufficient 'crud' in the way blocking
the visible light _will_ similarly interfere with the IR.

"broadband sensor" (IR/visible/UV) 'low light'/'night-vision' imaging
systems would have the best chance of seeing 'something' at a longer
distance.

>Are these systems available, because I can see a day when they will be
>available in cars. Imaging coming across a foggy patch of road and
>flipping on the old FLIR system to see where the curve in the road is
>or whether there's a bunch of cars piling up in front of you.

Without an illumination source, IR systems _don't_ work worth a d*mn for
seeing _passive_ things (e.g. the roadway) under many conditions,
unfortunately. The 'bunch of cars' has a better chance of being seen, since
they _are_ self-illuminating at IR, but the range improvement is -not-
terribly dramatic in heavy fog/snow situations,

If cost is _absolutely_ no object, there is also high-precision 'mapping'
radar. <grin>

Blueskies

October 6th 04, 12:14 AM

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message ...
> On 5 Oct 2004 05:21:06 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> > wrote:
>
>>>I say it's a fantastic job well done!
>>
>>So say us all!!
>>
>>Chuck (former NASA geek) S
>
> It was a great feat, done in typically inventive Rutan fashion. I'm
> just having a hard time imagining how it could be of any possible use
> to anyone besides Burt Rutan and Richard Branson. Is this to be the
> near space equivalent of a carnival thrill ride, albeit a hideously
> expensive and extremely dangerous one?
>
> I really do see this as an impressive engineering demonstration, it
> just seems so, I don't know, useless. It's like spending millions to
> develop a car that can go 2,000 miles per hour. What do you do with
> it? Where can you drive it?
>
> Corky Scott
>

Look here: http://www.nogravity.com/

ChuckSlusarczyk

October 6th 04, 12:51 AM

In article >, Ron Wanttaja says...

>I taped CNN's post-landing coverage and watched it last night. Dr.
>Diamandis is arranging additional money to encourage the other X-prize
>entrants to keep going. He says there's going to be a big Fly-Off in
>Arizona in 2006; they're going to bring all the contestants together and
>spend a week launching their vehicles. THAT'S going to be fun to watch.
>>

Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest except
with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
something? :-)

See ya

Chuck S

ChuckSlusarczyk

October 6th 04, 01:17 AM

In article >, Shiver Me Timbers says...
>
>TO THE GROUP ------> Correct me if I am wrong.
>
>According to the time stamps that I see on Chuck's postings in the
>thread in question, his first posting was at 12.42 where he introduced
>the Zoom and Juan factor into a thread congratulating Burt Rutan's
>accomplishment, and Chuck's congratulatory post to Burt and the gang
>did not take place until 2.02 Pm..... one hour and twenty minutes
>later.
>
>Chuck.... Those time stamps speak for themselves and I do believe I
>have my facts correct.

Your right the times are correct but so what. I did lots of e mails and some
postings that night and that's how they came out. I never realized that Rutan
would be insulted because I took a jab at zoom before I posted a congratulatory
post on RAH. I had already sent one to the Rutan home page. But you wouldn't
have known that would you? Me thinks you protest too much. I saw no protests
from you over the political debates between jaun and others .Nor any comments
about the threads about the cats .Nor any protests about many of the inane
discussions that appear on this group ..Only when I said something about zoom.
Once again I detect a bias sorry but that's how I feel.

>Since I have no axe to grind in the continuing saga of you, Zoom,
>and Juan, you will never find me putting my two cents into those
>discussions.

Timber what you say is true but that didn't stop you from criticizing me and
putting your .02 cents worth in that discussion. How can that be when you say
you have no ax to grind. Sorry But I smell an agenda...

>
>But Chuck the thread in question was not about you, Zoom, or Juan,
>it was about Burt Rutan and his historical accomplishment that day,
>and for whatever reason you just couldn't and wouldn't pass by the
>opportunity to introduce the Zoom factor and blow your nose.

I'll explain the relevance once again. zoom and jaun have been bragging about
how important a job zoom had with the project.I was merely commenting about what
seems to be a bit of empty noise from zoom and jaun. So my comments were
relevent.Maybe you don't think so but, hey it's a free country.

>And my question to you is why did you feel it necessary to detract from
>Burt's accomplishments just so you could advance your own personal
>agenda....??????

I don't think Burt gives a rat's patootie about what I wrote and besides I never
said anything that was detrimental about what they had accomplished.
That was all your perception. I still wonder who's got the agenda around here?

>
>It's not as if you couldn't have started up a new thread with a
>different subject line, like you have done dozens of times in the past.

I guess I could have but I never guessed that someone would take such offense
to such a minor thing. At this point let's just say we agree to disagree and
leave it at that. This discussion is pointless.

Have a nice day

Chuck S

bryan chaisone

October 6th 04, 01:34 AM

Roger Halstead > wrote in message >...
> People were getting choked up all over the place including the two
> watching from our place<:-))
>
> To me this was more momentous than the original Mercury flights and
> the whole project probably cost less than one of those capsules.

I don't know about more, but it ranks up there.

> The flight of SpaceShipOne is the opening of the door to space flight
> for industry and the world in a way that could never be approached by
> the governments of the world.

To me, it also saids that America still got it. We are still the
inovators. Not just a military bully. It sends a very positive
message.

> To me it now makes going to the other planets much more of a
> possibility but how long before "Protect the Planets" groups emerge?

I'm gonna form one right now! Just kidding.

> I say it's a fantastic job well done!

A big A+.

Bryan

bryan chaisone

October 6th 04, 01:39 AM

Ron Wanttaja > wrote in message >...

> He says there's going to be a big Fly-Off in
> Arizona in 2006; they're going to bring all the contestants together and
> spend a week launching their vehicles. THAT'S going to be fun to watch.
>
> Ron Wanttaja

I'm gonna be there for that one, if I can help it.

Bryan

bryan chaisone

October 6th 04, 01:46 AM

Shiver Me Timbers > wrote in message >...

> But Chuck the thread in question was not about you, Zoom, or Juan,
> it was about Burt Rutan and his historical accomplishment that day,

Yes. I feel for Chuck, but above statement is correct.

Bryan

Richard Lamb

October 6th 04, 03:37 AM

Richard Isakson wrote:
>
> "Shiver Me Timbers" wrote ...
> > But Chuck the thread in question was not about you, Zoom, or Juan,
> > it was about Burt Rutan and his historical accomplishment that day,
>
> "Historical" is probably a good discription. The technology used yesterday
> was fifty years old. The only real question was why it took twenty five
> million dollars of someone elses money to do it.
>
> On top of that, the reentry system was just about as dorky as you can get.
> Do you understand that if they go much higher that system won't work? Of
> course, even the X15 couldn't go much higher than it went because of reentry
> problems. Above 100 km its all free fall and that means higher reentry
> speeds and that means a different reentry method.
>
> Rich

and different control systems appropriate to the enviornment
eg: vernier thrusters for pitch. yaw, and roll.

BTW, isn't the X-15 hanging in the Smithsonian the one that did the
last speed dash - kinda melted in places?

Richard

Richard Lamb

October 6th 04, 03:39 AM

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote:
>
> In article >, Ron Wanttaja says...
>
> >I taped CNN's post-landing coverage and watched it last night. Dr.
> >Diamandis is arranging additional money to encourage the other X-prize
> >entrants to keep going. He says there's going to be a big Fly-Off in
> >Arizona in 2006; they're going to bring all the contestants together and
> >spend a week launching their vehicles. THAT'S going to be fun to watch.
> >>
>
> Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest except
> with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
> something? :-)
>
> See ya
>
> Chuck S

What's on your mind, Chuck?

Junk yard Spaceships?

Richard

Ron Wanttaja

October 6th 04, 03:55 AM

On 5 Oct 2004 16:51:43 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:

>In article >, Ron Wanttaja says...
>
>>I taped CNN's post-landing coverage and watched it last night. Dr.
>>Diamandis is arranging additional money to encourage the other X-prize
>>entrants to keep going. He says there's going to be a big Fly-Off in
>>Arizona in 2006; they're going to bring all the contestants together and
>>spend a week launching their vehicles. THAT'S going to be fun to watch.
>>>
>
>Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest except
>with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
>something? :-)

Depends on how much I can smuggle away from work under my coat. :-)

Ron Wanttaja

ChuckSlusarczyk

October 6th 04, 03:56 AM

In article >, Richard Lamb says...

>>Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest except
>> with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
>> something? :-)
>>
>> See ya
>>
>> Chuck S
>
>
>What's on your mind, Chuck?
>
>Junk yard Spaceships?

Heh Heh heh you read my mind, except this time the winner gets cash :-)They
could turn us loose in an old NASA dump and see what we could come up with.

See ya

Chuck (Miami gearhead) S

ChuckSlusarczyk

October 6th 04, 04:07 AM

In article >, Ron Wanttaja says...
>>>Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest except
>>with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
>>something? :-)
>
>Depends on how much I can smuggle away from work under my coat. :-)

I got some big coats :-)

Chuck S

Ron Wanttaja

October 6th 04, 04:19 AM

On 05 Oct 2004 19:53:04 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

>>Date: 10/5/2004 10:12 Central Daylight Time
>>Message-id: >
>>
>>On 5 Oct 2004 05:21:06 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:
>>
>>>>I say it's a fantastic job well done!
>>>
>>>So say us all!!
>>>
>>>Chuck (former NASA geek) S
>>
>>It was a great feat, done in typically inventive Rutan fashion. I'm
>>just having a hard time imagining how it could be of any possible use
>>to anyone besides Burt Rutan and Richard Branson. Is this to be the
>>near space equivalent of a carnival thrill ride, albeit a hideously
>>expensive and extremely dangerous one?

The same kind of launch has been available commercially for years at fairly
low prices...the difference now is that humans can *ride* the sounding
rocket. So the only real application is barnstorming.

>If the prices come down enough I could see this as an
>inercontinental/transcontinental business jet application.

Ummm, well. Sure, SpaceShipOne hauls, but the motor only burns for a
couple of minutes. If you try to get some horizontal range out of it,
it'll spend more energy fighting drag. Transatmospheric flight ain't my
bag, but I'm guessing you'll have to get at least half orbital velocity to
get the range to stretch out. That's two or three times faster than SS1.

Ron Wanttaja

Pete Schaefer

October 6th 04, 04:43 AM

NASA dump......hmmmmm......How big of an airplane can you build out of old
PowerPoint charts? So is this kinda along the lines of those contest where
they build boats out of cardboard?

"ChuckSlusarczyk" > wrote in message
...
> Heh Heh heh you read my mind, except this time the winner gets cash
:-)They
> could turn us loose in an old NASA dump and see what we could come up
with.

Jim Carriere

October 6th 04, 05:57 AM

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote:
> In article >, Ron Wanttaja says...
>
>>>>Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest except
>>>
>>>with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
>>>something? :-)
>>
>>Depends on how much I can smuggle away from work under my coat. :-)
>
>
>
> I got some big coats :-)

Remember the old Johnny Cash song about the guy built a Caddilac "one
piece at a time"?

Heheh, it wouldn't cost a dime, but if I remember right, in the song
it took a few years :(

B2431

October 6th 04, 06:06 AM

>From: ChuckSlusarczyk
>Date: 10/5/2004 18:51 Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>In article >, Ron Wanttaja says...
>
>>I taped CNN's post-landing coverage and watched it last night. Dr.
>>Diamandis is arranging additional money to encourage the other X-prize
>>entrants to keep going. He says there's going to be a big Fly-Off in
>>Arizona in 2006; they're going to bring all the contestants together and
>>spend a week launching their vehicles. THAT'S going to be fun to watch.
>>>
>
>Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest
>except
>with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
>something? :-)
>
>See ya
>
>Chuck S

Can I have exclusive media rights?

Will you and Ron flip a coin to see who goes into space first? As exclusive
reporter I expect to go up in this space ship of yours.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

B2431

October 6th 04, 06:10 AM

>From: Ron Wanttaja
>Date: 10/5/2004 21:55 Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>On 5 Oct 2004 16:51:43 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
> wrote:
>
>>In article >, Ron Wanttaja
>says...
>>
>>>I taped CNN's post-landing coverage and watched it last night. Dr.
>>>Diamandis is arranging additional money to encourage the other X-prize
>>>entrants to keep going. He says there's going to be a big Fly-Off in
>>>Arizona in 2006; they're going to bring all the contestants together and
>>>spend a week launching their vehicles. THAT'S going to be fun to watch.
>>>>
>>
>>Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest
>except
>>with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
>>something? :-)
>
>Depends on how much I can smuggle away from work under my coat. :-)
>
>Ron Wanttaja
>

Ron,do you take requests? NASA has more than enough T-38s. Would they notice if
you slipped one under your coat?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Richard Isakson

October 6th 04, 06:17 AM

"Richard Lamb" wrote ...

> BTW, isn't the X-15 hanging in the Smithsonian the one that did the
> last speed dash - kinda melted in places?

I'm not sure which one's in the Smithsonian. It's interesting to note that
at the end of the program the total non-capture flight time for the whole
fleet was only 30 hours. The hours don't add up very fast when the average
flight times are eight to ten minutes ... even if the distances cover a
couple of states. Their normal high speed run dropped over northern Nevada
and landed at Edwards about twelve minutes later.

Rich

Roger Halstead

October 6th 04, 07:13 AM

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 23:14:59 GMT, "Blueskies" > wrote:

>
>"Corky Scott" > wrote in message ...
>> On 5 Oct 2004 05:21:06 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>>I say it's a fantastic job well done!
>>>
>>>So say us all!!
>>>
>>>Chuck (former NASA geek) S
>>
>> It was a great feat, done in typically inventive Rutan fashion. I'm
>> just having a hard time imagining how it could be of any possible use
>> to anyone besides Burt Rutan and Richard Branson. Is this to be the
>> near space equivalent of a carnival thrill ride, albeit a hideously
>> expensive and extremely dangerous one?
>>
>> I really do see this as an impressive engineering demonstration, it
>> just seems so, I don't know, useless. It's like spending millions to
>> develop a car that can go 2,000 miles per hour. What do you do with
>> it? Where can you drive it?
>>
>> Corky Scott
>>
>
>
>Look here: http://www.nogravity.com/

Better known as the Vomit comet. No, that was the one the Astronauts
train in.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

>
>

Ron Wanttaja

October 6th 04, 07:57 AM

On 06 Oct 2004 05:10:02 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

>>From: Ron Wanttaja
>>
>>>Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest
>>except
>>>with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
>>>something? :-)
>>
>>Depends on how much I can smuggle away from work under my coat. :-)
>
>Ron,do you take requests? NASA has more than enough T-38s. Would they notice if
>you slipped one under your coat?

Probably, since I don't work for NASA. My employer only has one, they're
likely to notice if it's missing. :-)

Ron Wanttaja

B2431

October 6th 04, 09:14 AM

>From: Ron Wanttaja
>Date: 10/6/2004 01:57 Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>On 06 Oct 2004 05:10:02 GMT, (B2431) wrote:
>
>>>From: Ron Wanttaja
>>>
>>>>Now that will be just to cool.Kinda like a giant model airplane contest
>>>except
>>>>with full size models. Ron how fast do you think we can we come up with
>>>>something? :-)
>>>
>>>Depends on how much I can smuggle away from work under my coat. :-)
>>
>>Ron,do you take requests? NASA has more than enough T-38s. Would they notice
>if
>>you slipped one under your coat?
>
>Probably, since I don't work for NASA. My employer only has one, they're
>likely to notice if it's missing. :-)
>
>Ron Wanttaja

Hey, it was worth a shot. It's OK, I am used to rejection, I was married for
almost 20 years.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Capt.Doug

October 10th 04, 11:49 AM

>"Corky Scott" wrote in message
> Don't know if you've been reading the trade magazines Shiver, but a
> kind of forward looking viewing process has been developed with Alaska
> as the testing area.

Sounds like you are describing TAWS (terrain awareness system). All turbine
aircraft with 6 or more seats are required to have it next year. I get to
play with one in the MD-80. It's cool. It shows elevations that are below
you in green and elevations above you in red. It has good detail even after
the FAA made the manufacturers dumb down the display image so that pilots
wouldn't navigate mountain passes in zero/zero. The cost is between $12k and
$40k depending on the complexity of the unit and installation. There are
some units on the market that do the same thing for a lot less money but
they aren't TSO'd.

D.