-
#360
by
Jim
on 15 May, 2014 17:52
-
I think we are in complete agreement. You are correct that this won't happen, for the reasons you mention. But I'm correct when I said the only obstacles were paperwork, (a) and (b), and pride, (c), (d), and (e).
That is not "paperwork". That goes into the very being of what it means to be a natural citizen and allegiance to a country. Most national secrets are not shared.
And it is not "pride", it is protecting national security
-
#361
by
LouScheffer
on 16 May, 2014 01:28
-
But I suspect (though obviously cannot prove) that the intelligence departments of France, Israel, China, etc. are already well aware of what our reconnaissance satellite can do, and refusing to do something because they *might* find out is probably more of a detriment to us rather than to them.
No basis for such a suspicion. They don't know the existence of some programs much less capabilities.
Unsubstantiated. And totally unsubstantiatable. You (and I) can't possibly know what it is that foreign intelligence services know. And if you did know, you could not say. And how can you possibly know that programs exist they know nothing of?
There have been spies who were caught (see Jonathan Pollard). He passed along "the latest version of Radio-Signal Notations (RASIN), a 10-volume manual comprehensively detailing America's global electronic surveillance network". There have been those that got hold of secrets, were not caught (at least in time) and went public (See Snowden). He took about 1.7 million documents. So how can you possibly be sure there are no spies that have not yet been caught? You can't, of course.
-
#362
by
Lar
on 16 May, 2014 01:44
-
I am not sure where you are born is a good metric for how much of a patriot you are... we all know relatives who immigrated and were very patriotic about and loyal to their adopted country. But this Ariane/security takes us far afield from the RD-180 story... so lets circle back.
-
#363
by
Jim
on 16 May, 2014 01:59
-
Unsubstantiated. And totally unsubstantiatable. You (and I) can't possibly know what it is that foreign intelligence services know. And if you did know, you could not say. And how can you possibly know that programs exist they know nothing of?
There have been spies who were caught (see Jonathan Pollard). He passed along "the latest version of Radio-Signal Notations (RASIN), a 10-volume manual comprehensively detailing America's global electronic surveillance network". There have been those that got hold of secrets, were not caught (at least in time) and went public (See Snowden). He took about 1.7 million documents. So how can you possibly be sure there are no spies that have not yet been caught? You can't, of course.
Wrong, I can of course. There are much more secrets kept than revealed or uncovered. That is how it is substantiated. there are deep programs that few people know exist much less foreign agents. What spies have found is only the outer layer of the onion. I know because that is how security works.
-
#364
by
Patchouli
on 16 May, 2014 03:02
-
I remember old Boeing images of CST on DIV with two solids.
But I bet you've never seen an image of Dreamchaser on Delta IV.
So. Does NASA let Russia ipso facto make the commercial crew downselect decision?
I've seen Dreamchaser on an Ares derived vehicle with two custom upper stages replacing the Ares I-US.
It looks like possibly a 1.5 segment SRB and a Centaur derived stage or Castor 30XL making it a three stage vehicle.
-
#365
by
Lobo
on 16 May, 2014 05:05
-
I remember old Boeing images of CST on DIV with two solids.
But I bet you've never seen an image of Dreamchaser on Delta IV.
So. Does NASA let Russia ipso facto make the commercial crew downselect decision?
I've seen Dreamchaser on an Ares derived vehicle with two custom upper stages replacing the Ares I-US.
It looks like possibly a 1.5 segment SRB and a Centaur derived stage or Castor 30XL making it a three stage vehicle.
Looks like maybe a Castor 120 on top. Maybe a 2-seg booster under it with a full 5-seg booster 1st stage?
hmmm...wild.
-
#366
by
PahTo
on 16 May, 2014 05:08
-
I've seen Dreamchaser on an Ares derived vehicle with two custom upper stages replacing the Ares I-US.
It looks like possibly a 1.5 segment SRB and a Centaur derived stage or Castor 30XL making it a three stage vehicle.
Looks like maybe a Castor 120 on top. Maybe a 2-seg booster under it with a full 5-seg booster 1st stage?
hmmm...wild.
Indeed--more of a stick than even The Stick...
-
#367
by
Lobo
on 16 May, 2014 06:03
-
I've seen Dreamchaser on an Ares derived vehicle with two custom upper stages replacing the Ares I-US.
It looks like possibly a 1.5 segment SRB and a Centaur derived stage or Castor 30XL making it a three stage vehicle.
Looks like maybe a Castor 120 on top. Maybe a 2-seg booster under it with a full 5-seg booster 1st stage?
hmmm...wild.
Indeed--more of a stick than even The Stick...
A corndog without the corn or the dog.
-
#368
by
DGH
on 16 May, 2014 11:17
-
Why would military/intel payloads for the USA launch on Ariane when we still have Delta IV?
I have decided after reading the threads this last week that the Delta IV rocket and the RS-68A engine are figments of my imagination.
Clearly you suffer from the same delusion.
-
#369
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 16 May, 2014 16:17
-
Why would military/intel payloads for the USA launch on Ariane when we still have Delta IV?
Stripped of all other concerns, it's the same one that made Atlas-V more successful than Delta-IV in getting launch contracts - per-unit cost.
-
#370
by
RocketGoBoom
on 16 May, 2014 16:35
-
Wrong, I can of course. There are much more secrets kept than revealed or uncovered. That is how it is substantiated. there are deep programs that few people know exist much less foreign agents. What spies have found is only the outer layer of the onion. I know because that is how security works.
I doubt it. If you were actually in the know about anything substantive you would be incredibly foolish to be bragging or even hinting about it.
Having gone through level 6 public trust security clearance process (contractor for HHS database work a few years ago) I would not want to be answering an FBI agent about my 21,220 posts on a public website related to my professional work. That is a fairly quick way to fail a security clearance checkup at your next 10 year update.
-
#371
by
BrightLight
on 16 May, 2014 16:42
-
Wrong, I can of course. There are much more secrets kept than revealed or uncovered. That is how it is substantiated. there are deep programs that few people know exist much less foreign agents. What spies have found is only the outer layer of the onion. I know because that is how security works.
I doubt it. If you were actually in the know about anything substantive you would be incredibly foolish to be bragging or even hinting about it.
Having gone through level 6 public trust security clearance process (contractor for HHS database work a few years ago) I would not want to be answering an FBI agent about my 21,220 posts on a public website related to my professional work. That is a fairly quick way to fail a security clearance checkup at your next 10 year update.
my super secret-squirrel antennas tell me this is OT.
-
#372
by
CapitalistOppressor
on 17 May, 2014 13:39
-
Does anyone seriously think that Russia would have specifically sanctioned their support activities re the RD-180 if they did not believe it would impact US operations?
It's right in their statement to the press. If they didn't think it was important they wouldn't have mentioned it.
This thread has already mentioned rumors that there is a team of Russian engineers at every launch. If they aren't a part of the launch process why would they be here? If they could just certify an engine as ready to launch remotely, why not do that?
Unless it's just some boondoggle, you'd think that they would just stay in Russia and use the internet if there wasn't a reason to fly halfway across the world. But even having to be involved directly in the launch process remotely would be a problem if that support is cut off.
There are rumors of spare parts and launch cartridges being supplied at launch, which would at least be consistent with a Russian team being on site. Of course we have one rumor supporting another rumor, but that just adds up to a bigger rumor.
Still, if there was a line in Vegas to bet on this issue, my money would be on this being a real problem, even if the next Atlas V launches on schedule.
-
#373
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 17 May, 2014 14:30
-
-
#374
by
DGH
on 18 May, 2014 17:22
-
Not sure if anyone has tried this or if this is the right thread to do this on.
What launches are most affected if this happens?
Here is what I have so far.
Launches in 2016 and later but before 2020.
Launches on an Atlas 531, 541 or 551.
Launches that need to be man rated.
Launches that carry nuclear fuel.
MUOS and GOES are major losers.
AEHF can probably launch on a Delta 5,4 because of it’s Hall thrusters and margin.
Delta IV Heavy flights in 2017 or so may be impacted to free up engines.
-
#375
by
Jim
on 18 May, 2014 20:27
-
Not sure if anyone has tried this or if this is the right thread to do this on.
What launches are most affected if this happens?
Here is what I have so far.
Launches in 2016 and later but before 2020.
Launches on an Atlas 531, 541 or 551.
Launches that need to be man rated.
Launches that carry nuclear fuel.
MUOS and GOES are major losers.
AEHF can probably launch on a Delta 5,4 because of it’s Hall thrusters and margin.
Delta IV Heavy flights in 2017 or so may be impacted to free up engines.
431 too
-
#376
by
baldusi
on 19 May, 2014 01:04
-
Not sure if anyone has tried this or if this is the right thread to do this on.
What launches are most affected if this happens?
Here is what I have so far.
Launches in 2016 and later but before 2020.
Launches on an Atlas 531, 541 or 551.
Launches that need to be man rated.
Launches that carry nuclear fuel.
MUOS and GOES are major losers.
AEHF can probably launch on a Delta 5,4 because of it’s Hall thrusters and margin.
Delta IV Heavy flights in 2017 or so may be impacted to free up engines.
431 too
Delta IV M+(4,4) is available in 36 month, if necessary, according to ULA. (5,6) or (5,8) in 48 and would need modified cores.
-
#377
by
Jim
on 19 May, 2014 01:07
-
(5,6) or (5,8) in 48 and would need modified cores.
And some pad mods and longer processing times
-
#378
by
kevin-rf
on 19 May, 2014 02:42
-
Why longer processing times? Do adding 2/4 extra solids really impact the pad flow that much?
-
#379
by
Jim
on 19 May, 2014 03:05
-
Why longer processing times? Do adding 2/4 extra solids really impact the pad flow that much?
The pad was never really design for solids.
