Author Topic: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2  (Read 515383 times)

Offline buzz123

  • Member
  • Posts: 16
  • Liked: 0
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4095 on: 01/08/2009 08:36 PM »
Congrats on the PM article!  In addition to the exposure, it's great having an independent look at the JUS!  I'm looking forward to reading the whole article but especially what is on page 57.  I've been following this since day 1 of the original DIRECT Goes Live Thread and it's been quite an experience watching things unfold.  Good luck with your trip! 

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16014
  • Liked: 9
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4096 on: 01/08/2009 09:41 PM »
This was the one for the 15th.   But since we started talking about that date *another* has slipped inside that too :)   I've been dropping hints like crazy, but y'all will have to wait a few more days to hear more.

Lets just say that you ought not to worry if you don't hear from me for a few days.   I expect to be offline until Saturday or Sunday.

"What do you hear, Starbuck?" ;)

Ross.

Beautiful cover image. I was all hell bent to go to the store and get a copy, but it looks like I have to wait. Worth it though.

"I hear nothing but the rain"...I have an idea  ;)

Good luck you guys, and God speed. You're an inspiration. You've done a fantastic job in answering our questions, being honest, and providing NASA and your country with the next step forward in space. I'll have a nice scotch tonight in your dedication.
Go Direct, Go!
« Last Edit: 01/08/2009 09:52 PM by robertross »

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 617
  • Liked: 2
  • Long Beach, Ca
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4097 on: 01/08/2009 10:58 PM »
I managed to get my laptop to connect, so now I can keep a close eye on zapkitty.   That bleedin' cat is gonna enjoy a visit to the vet if he keeps on making a mess all over the place ;) LOL

And Yegor, yeah, I know what you mean.   We're not going to have much internet access for a few days, and very little time too, so we (Chuck and I) are going "quiet", but I hear ya -- I've had that "waiting for a bus" feeling all week, we've been waiting for ages and suddenly a whole line of things are all happening at the same time -- all the buses came at once!

I've had about 6 hours sleep in the last three day and I'm pretty sure I've got a full couple of days ahead of me.   I can't talk about any of the details yet, but now is the time to wish us luck!

Ross.

God Speed Ross and to the DIRECT team!
« Last Edit: 01/08/2009 11:25 PM by Khadgars »

Offline Integrator

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
  • Liked: 0
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4098 on: 01/08/2009 11:02 PM »
The Force will be with you.

INTEGRATOR
"Daddy, does that rocket carry people?"
"No buddy, just satellites."
"Why not?"
   --- 5 year old son of jjnodice,  21.01.2011

Offline MP99

  • Armchair rocket scientist.
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5089
  • Liked: 34
  • UK
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4099 on: 01/08/2009 11:13 PM »
However, it would take the Direct team to provide me with an exclusive run on such news, because the other key element of this site is we never run second hand content.


Am I mis-reading this? ? ? ? You really won't report this unless DIRECT gives you an exclusive and refuses to talk to the rest of the press or any other news site? ? ? ? Hard not to understand your comment as meaning exactly this. Jeez.

I can understand if you need to hear directly from the source before you publish, but to say you won't list a news item just because someone else scooped you by 10 minutes is simply petty. It's still news (and directly from the souce), it's just not an exclusive.

I need to subscribe to some other news sites, I think, to hear all the news that you refuse to publish because someone beat you to it.

Martin

PS I'm very strongly tempted to apologise for such a dismissive tone, but if you really refuse to publish news because someone beat you to it, then you're not a news site, you're just screaming "first!" out to the internet. I would love to apologise if I've misunderstood the comment that I've quoted above, or its context.

Offline gladiator1332

  • Mike Majeski
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2423
  • Liked: 0
  • Middleburg Heights, OH
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4100 on: 01/08/2009 11:59 PM »
Could we take all of this somewhere else? This is supposed to be discussion about DIRECT. If you have a problem with how Chris runs his site, take it up with him in a PM. This is not the time nor the place to debate this.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16014
  • Liked: 9
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4101 on: 01/09/2009 12:17 AM »
I got it, I got it!

Well, most of what's written is to be found within these hallowed threads & posts, but the weight of the article is jaw dropping, and I anticipate a surge* of interest in the general public when they read this.

* (maybe 1%, which is alot for the USA)

I would love to know where to get images of the J-2X engine like the one in the article. Beautiful.

The Direct team should be very proud of this acheivement. Definitely an issue for collectors.

And you gotta love having nasaspaceflight.com right there in the first line, as someone else here already pointed out. I'd be interested to know how the member ticker goes up in the next 1-2 months. :)

Offline Chris Bergin

  • NSF Managing Editor
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 91758
  • Liked: 1516
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4102 on: 01/09/2009 12:38 AM »
However, it would take the Direct team to provide me with an exclusive run on such news, because the other key element of this site is we never run second hand content.


Am I mis-reading this? ? ? ? You really won't report this unless DIRECT gives you an exclusive and refuses to talk to the rest of the press or any other news site? ? ? ? Hard not to understand your comment as meaning exactly this. Jeez.

I can understand if you need to hear directly from the source before you publish, but to say you won't list a news item just because someone else scooped you by 10 minutes is simply petty. It's still news (and directly from the souce), it's just not an exclusive.

I need to subscribe to some other news sites, I think, to hear all the news that you refuse to publish because someone beat you to it.

Martin

PS I'm very strongly tempted to apologise for such a dismissive tone, but if you really refuse to publish news because someone beat you to it, then you're not a news site, you're just screaming "first!" out to the internet. I would love to apologise if I've misunderstood the comment that I've quoted above, or its context.

Heh. I'll try and explain it better ;)

We cover NASA and current vehicles - we are not covering Direct's development (and no news media site is). You're seeing numerous news media taking up a feature on Direct and that's cool - we've done the same back in 2006 and we've got the forum threads (also cool). No one is "missing" anything due to the update threads.

It was intimated why we had not run another article on Direct based on (a) The latest magazine feature. Reason: not a viable news story for us to run with for the reasons given in my other post, and (b) That we might pending any big news that directly (pun intended) relates to NASA's CxP direction.

I noted (b) would be viable if we get the news off the Direct team. Reason: It is unviable as a news site to rehash something already reported by another site. Some sites do re-write previously run content (with the "according to a report in the Blah Blah news...", but not us - we break news here for the reasons given of bringing something new to the party. But we still would run something if we had an additional angle. Basically, it HAS to be fresh news. No one here wants to re-read something they already know, and rightly so.

"Exclusive run" means breaking the news, it does not mean "do not to speak to another site." They are under no obligation to come to me with a breaking development, but the point is if they did, then I would run it (which answers the orginal question).

So the bottom line is "yes" I would write a news article about Direct (I believe the intimation is I'm avoiding such content), but "no" I wouldn't write an article on news already reported, as the readership of this site expects me to give them something new in the articles.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16014
  • Liked: 9
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4103 on: 01/09/2009 12:59 AM »
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Direct team came back from their undisclosed location, and offer you (Chris) a nice scoop, worthy of an article. Not to say they will, and maybe it still isn't time to break the seal on any really big one (whatever that may be), but we at least have to be grateful that much of their discussions are based here on this site, and that says something.

Edit: 'We' instead of 'you'
« Last Edit: 01/09/2009 01:02 AM by robertross »

Offline Khadgars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 617
  • Liked: 2
  • Long Beach, Ca
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4104 on: 01/09/2009 01:05 AM »
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Direct team came back from their undisclosed location, and offer you (Chris) a nice scoop, worthy of an article. Not to say they will, and maybe it still isn't time to break the seal on any really big one (whatever that may be), but we at least have to be grateful that much of their discussions are based here on this site, and that says something.

Edit: 'We' instead of 'you'

Agreed, we are very fortunate to have them so active here.

Offline Lab Lemming

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 448
  • Liked: 0
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4105 on: 01/09/2009 01:07 AM »
What happened to the basal heating taper?

Wow, that's a nice cover and on a big publication.

Is that one of your graphics Pheogh?

So, Ross and Chuck are going to be on an episode of Battlestar Galactica?

Moon, Mars and New Caprica? ;)

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21766
  • Liked: 9
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4106 on: 01/09/2009 01:18 AM »
Just to let the DIRECT guys know, Old Town Alexandria is a great place to get a bite to eat and relax, and if internet is an issue Just go to the Air and Space Museum on the mall, they have free WI-fi (practically lived there for spring break)

Offline gladiator1332

  • Mike Majeski
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2423
  • Liked: 0
  • Middleburg Heights, OH
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4107 on: 01/09/2009 01:52 AM »
Now to actually discuss the content of the article...

I was a little disappointed in the comparison graphic PM decided to use. I wish they had used the graphic that the Direct team has used in the past, that shows the Shuttle and compares Ares and Jupiter.
This more clearly shows how Ares is not truly Shuttle derived.

Offline zapkitty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 358
  • Liked: 0
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4108 on: 01/09/2009 02:07 AM »
And from that other publication today:
301051main_Space_Transportation_Association_8_Jan_09.pdf

From Griffin...
Quote
... Constellation is also designed to support ISS but, as clearly stated from the outset, only if commercial service fails to materialize. Constellation is not focused
on or designed for maximum efficiency in LEO operations.

Hmmm.... doesn't this flatly contradict the criticism of Direct that the J-120 "overshoots" ISS requirements?

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16014
  • Liked: 9
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
Re: DIRECT v2.0 - Thread 2
« Reply #4109 on: 01/09/2009 02:11 AM »
I didn't consider the article as 'agressive', that's for sure. It was tempered by various statements, almost leaving it up to the reader to draw their own conclusions. Since there were no numbers to back up either side, due most likely to limited pages and the less tech-savy public, I wonder how people would vote on such statements.

I'm thinking it will at least draw attention to shuttle retirement, re-living nostalgic memories of Apollo 11, Challenger & Columbia, and of course the cost in today's fiscal environment. But I'm betting overall it will plant the seed that maybe NASA needs a shake-up and some real hard questions answered. It may just get Direct that new study to look at all the options and a fair and unbiased comparison.

One disappointment was the lack of their website address in the article.

Tags: