-
#220
by
Prober
on 20 Oct, 2013 17:33
-
The shutdown is over and dozens of images have been uploaded.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2explore/
better yet the Gov can now cut Orbital a check. 
If it was FY13 money, the lapse in appropriations was irrelevant.
But now there is someone sitting in the treasury department that can write that 5 million dollar check for the last milestone.
You got it
Now the Contractor (Orbital) can get paid for their per their contract.
-
#221
by
Antares
on 21 Oct, 2013 01:35
-
How do you know who was working (and how much) during the shutdown and who wasn't? You're making assumptions based on stereotypes. Any checks using FY13 money were still cut.
-
#222
by
MP99
on 21 Oct, 2013 12:08
-
The Treasury does not obligate money. Agencies do, and the ability to spend FY13 money was not impacted. The funding is not included in the CR since it was FY13 money. Please learn government budgeting before arguing about it.
While that's understandable for Orb-D1, are you sure that's true for all Orb-1 milestones, also?
I can make a few points that suggest it strongly but are not conclusive.
1) I took the original "cut a check" comment in relation to D1 milestones not Orb-1.
2) Station Program management took the position that supply vehicles were part of protection life and property and did not fully furlough staff in that area.
3) D1 and Orb-1 milestones have been delayed from earlier in the year and did not require New Obligation Authority.
Budget and procurement are actually somewhat fascinating for technical folks because the rules are ignored or skirted so often. Knowing them, and how they are interpreted, helps anticipate what the government might do or what the bean counters inside the government might try to do to the people wanting to do the work (both gov and contractor).
Thanks for the insight.
Obviously, I was thinking of the time the milestone payments would become due, not the time when the payments became obligated. Now you point it out, I can see how these come under FY13.
cheers, Martin
-
#223
by
Lar
on 23 Oct, 2013 18:46
-
-
#224
by
Alpha Control
on 23 Oct, 2013 19:13
-
The recent article ( http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/10/cygnus-departs-destructive-farewell/ ) has a picture of a LEGO model of Cygnus on CAPCOM's stand. Someone on L2 (jokingly?) said they wanted it. I posted the info there but decided here is better, it's all public info.
Here's info:
http://rebrickable.com/sets/StephenPakbaz/cygnus
You can build it yourself, if you have the pieces, the instructions are there. You'll need LDD [1] to read the instruction file. (as a note, I've seen a copy of this model in person at last year's Brickfair if I'm not misremembering)
Stephen Pakbaz has some prior space cred, having done Mars rovers (which got 10,000 votes on LEGO CUUSOO) and some other neat stuff. Real nice guy. Here is a shot of the model interior showing what a clever build it is... 12 sided things are non trivial to do with LEGO elements.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/65402716@N07/7539524714/
Edit: If you want the parts without rooting in your collection for them, this site has copies for sale:
http://www.brixalot.com/pages/for_sale.htm#Cygnus_I 180 USD.
I can't vouch for it myself but expect it would work out fine. The site also has an Orbital logo (as a mosaic) and a small sat among its models for sale.
1 - freely available from LEGO at http://ldd.lego.com/en-us/download/
I took a look at the brixalot site. Very impressive Cygnus build!
They also have a Pegasus. I wonder if a certain Dr. E has one of those?
-
#225
by
ugordan
on 24 Oct, 2013 16:46
-
Watching the mission highlights video, I'm reminded of something that intrigued me: the Antares (as well as Cygnus apparently) onboard video. It looks digital based on occasional artifacts (wavelety-looking), but the image quality appears to degrade more gracefully than for example SpaceX's recent onboard video where you either have signal or have a complete dropout.
If it really is digital, I was wondering if Orbital is employing some custom codec? Doesn't look MPEG-like to me.
EDIT: seems like a similar system was flown on the Ariane 5 with ATV-4: www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-32EgwhJ8w
-
#226
by
Prober
on 24 Oct, 2013 22:42
-
-
#227
by
Lar
on 24 Oct, 2013 22:45
-
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=29378.0;attach=537826[/url]
Been holding off on printing one for the office as Manboy likes to do upgrades. Hope he adds just a little more detail then Im off and printing.
He's not printing LEGO elements.
I mean, if you want an accurate model, fine, be that way. But if you want the best model available at that scale made from LEGO... no, you can't print it.
-
#228
by
dcporter
on 25 Oct, 2013 02:41
-
You have to be suuuper cool before you're cooler than a lower-fidelity Lego version.
-
#229
by
Mapperuo
on 25 Oct, 2013 09:42
-
Watching the mission highlights video, I'm reminded of something that intrigued me: the Antares (as well as Cygnus apparently) onboard video. It looks digital based on occasional artifacts (wavelety-looking), but the image quality appears to degrade more gracefully than for example SpaceX's recent onboard video where you either have signal or have a complete dropout.
If it really is digital, I was wondering if Orbital is employing some custom codec? Doesn't look MPEG-like to me.
EDIT: seems like a similar system was flown on the Ariane 5 with ATV-4: www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-32EgwhJ8w
I think the Spacex complete dropout buffering graphic was on purpose for whatever reason, I'd have preferred to see the raw feed with breakup, may have saw more video.
-
#230
by
QuantumG
on 25 Oct, 2013 10:29
-
I think the Spacex complete dropout buffering graphic was on purpose for whatever reason, I'd have preferred to see the raw feed with breakup, may have saw more video.
There was no feed during those periods. The receiving dish at VAFB got knocked out of alignment by the launch.
-
#231
by
ugordan
on 25 Oct, 2013 11:08
-
I think the Spacex complete dropout buffering graphic was on purpose for whatever reason, I'd have preferred to see the raw feed with breakup, may have saw more video.
I'm not even talking about the complete breakup, I'm talking about how the picture completely falls apart when transmission glitches are present, see the MVac ignition moment.
Orbital's feed seems to behave more "analog-like" with increasing amounts of noise when transmission has errors. You could say it's best of both worlds - the analog "resiliency" and digital image quality.
-
#232
by
arachnitect
on 25 Oct, 2013 14:01
-
I think the Spacex complete dropout buffering graphic was on purpose for whatever reason, I'd have preferred to see the raw feed with breakup, may have saw more video.
I'm not even talking about the complete breakup, I'm talking about how the picture completely falls apart when transmission glitches are present, see the MVac ignition moment.
Orbital's feed seems to behave more "analog-like" with increasing amounts of noise when transmission has errors. You could say it's best of both worlds - the analog "resiliency" and digital image quality.
You may be on to something, it looks like Orbital are using RocketCam, which does offer something like you're describing. I'm guessing SpaceX uses an in-house system that's all digital.
Ecliptic's integrated RocketCam™ systems help you understand and appreciate what your remote, complex system is doing and experiencing in extreme environments.
You don't need a high-end, expensive, science-quality imaging system. RocketCam™ systems provide engineering and PR-quality situational awareness within a small, rugged, cost-effective package, and are available in analog (Analog Video Systems, AVS), digital (Digital Video System, DVS), and hybrid analog-digital configurations (Integrated Video Assembly, IVA).
-
#233
by
ww2planes1
on 25 Oct, 2013 14:28
-
You may be on to something, it looks like Orbital are using RocketCam, which does offer something like you're describing. I'm guessing SpaceX uses an in-house system that's all digital.
According to their "platforms" page, both Taurus II (looks like they haven't updated in a while) and Cygnus use RocketCam.
http://eclipticenterprises.com/platformsAnd given SpaceX's goal of maximizing vertical integration, using an in-house developed system makes sense for them.
-
#234
by
russianhalo117
on 25 Oct, 2013 15:30
-
You may be on to something, it looks like Orbital are using RocketCam, which does offer something like you're describing. I'm guessing SpaceX uses an in-house system that's all digital.
According to their "platforms" page, both Taurus II (looks like they haven't updated in a while) and Cygnus use RocketCam.
http://eclipticenterprises.com/platforms
And given SpaceX's goal of maximizing vertical integration, using an in-house developed system makes sense for them.
Try looking under Antares as the name of the launcher changed quite a while ago as well as the edition of the Castor 30B and Castor 30XL Solid Rocket Motors as additional options for the second stage motor.
-
#235
by
sublimemarsupial
on 25 Oct, 2013 15:41
-
You may be on to something, it looks like Orbital are using RocketCam, which does offer something like you're describing. I'm guessing SpaceX uses an in-house system that's all digital.
According to their "platforms" page, both Taurus II (looks like they haven't updated in a while) and Cygnus use RocketCam.
http://eclipticenterprises.com/platforms
And given SpaceX's goal of maximizing vertical integration, using an in-house developed system makes sense for them.
At least some of the Falcon 1 flights used off the shelf GoPro cameras that they modified. Don't know about F9.
-
#236
by
Lars_J
on 26 Oct, 2013 03:56
-
I think the Spacex complete dropout buffering graphic was on purpose for whatever reason, I'd have preferred to see the raw feed with breakup, may have saw more video.
There was no feed during those periods. The receiving dish at VAFB got knocked out of alignment by the launch.
That explains some if it, but not all. Look at the recent SpaceX video for the launch, it has more footage from that main rocket camera than the launch feed had, especially at stage separation.
-
#237
by
Lar
on 26 Oct, 2013 04:02
-
You have to be suuuper cool before you're cooler than a lower-fidelity Lego version.
That's what I'm talking about, right there.
THAT said I am glad they weren't using the (rebranded Logictech) LEGO camera for their onboard camera
