The Universe was created, without archetype, template, or memory.
It was created as if spontaneity and artistry reached a crescendo,
in the heart and soul of an unknown force.
Looking into the silent deep, men viewed the stars, the planets, and the moon,
and they wondered. Science and art and inspiration drew upon these,
and began to compose the destiny for mankind.
The creation of light and dark, of eternity and time, might be reflective of
a principle of duality that underlies all of nature.
The gentle image of a crescent moon has within it two opposite,
but complimentary shapes. They play out upon a stage in the heavens
and inspire our imaginations.
http://www.deutschegrammophon.com/play.htm...mentary-long.rm
Full Version: A Light Read
To get from the idea of a flat Earth to a round one, or from a round Universe
to a flat one, we must go through observations by direct or indirect means.
Once, ships moved to the curved horizon, and landfall rose from the waters.
The world became round.
And now spaceships look for horizons, and sail above the planet using extraordinary means.
Robert Goddard, 1882-1945, was a pioneer in rocketry,
and held 214 related patents. He ushered in the dawn
of space exploration.
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/RGoddard....l?1079254963980
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/RGoddard2...l?1079257498250
Rocket launch from Roswell, New Mexico. Goddard picked the site because it had mild weather, flat ground, and a low population.
to a flat one, we must go through observations by direct or indirect means.
Once, ships moved to the curved horizon, and landfall rose from the waters.
The world became round.
And now spaceships look for horizons, and sail above the planet using extraordinary means.
Robert Goddard, 1882-1945, was a pioneer in rocketry,
and held 214 related patents. He ushered in the dawn
of space exploration.
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/RGoddard....l?1079254963980
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/RGoddard2...l?1079257498250
Rocket launch from Roswell, New Mexico. Goddard picked the site because it had mild weather, flat ground, and a low population.
Wernher von Braun is, without doubt, the greatest rocket scientist in history.
Inspired by stories of Robert Goddard's writings, as a young man,
Von Bruan later became head of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.
He lead the development of the Saturn V booster rocket that helped land
the first men on the Moon in July 1969.
Von Braun was born in Germany in 1912, but by the time he was 12,
he was arrested. He built the first rocket powered wagon,
using six large fireworks, but that did not impress the local police.
He eventually designed the V-2 rocket that was used so effectively against
Britain during World War II.
At age 33, he was taken into custody by allied forces, and eventually,
brought to the United States.
http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/vba2a...en|Surrendering
Inspired by stories of Robert Goddard's writings, as a young man,
Von Bruan later became head of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.
He lead the development of the Saturn V booster rocket that helped land
the first men on the Moon in July 1969.
Von Braun was born in Germany in 1912, but by the time he was 12,
he was arrested. He built the first rocket powered wagon,
using six large fireworks, but that did not impress the local police.
He eventually designed the V-2 rocket that was used so effectively against
Britain during World War II.
At age 33, he was taken into custody by allied forces, and eventually,
brought to the United States.
http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/vba2a...en|Surrendering
The Russians were never very far behind in dreaming of going into space.
An early visionary was Tsiolkovsky. IN 1903, he introduced the 'Rocket Equation'.
It actually describes the benefits of an engine that uses electric propulsion.
http://www.informatics.org/museum/tsiol.html
As early as 1929, they had a small working model at the Gas Dynamics Laboratory
in Leningrad. It was designed by V.P. Glushko, who continued to
lead Russian rocket development until 1989.
In their youth, many important thinkers in space science were influenced by
Jules Verne, and various astronomy articles. They went on to dream
about living in space. But, their political leaders had other ideas.
Both the U. S. and the Russians realized the potential of rocketry as
a military weapon. They began experimental programs. The United States
started with high-altitude atmospheric sounding rockets, one of Goddard's early ideas.
Those types of studies are useful for many experiments.
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/Sounding....l?1079274801810
Later, a variety of medium- and long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles
were developed. These became the starting point of the U.S. space
program. Missiles such as the Redstone, Atlas, and Titan would eventually launch
astronauts into space.
In 1959, the Soviets launched a probe, Luna III. It got the first picture of the
dark side of the moon. A large crater they discovered was named after Tsiolkovsky.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/lo3_m121.gif
Tsiolkovsky and V.P Glushko
An early visionary was Tsiolkovsky. IN 1903, he introduced the 'Rocket Equation'.
It actually describes the benefits of an engine that uses electric propulsion.
http://www.informatics.org/museum/tsiol.html
As early as 1929, they had a small working model at the Gas Dynamics Laboratory
in Leningrad. It was designed by V.P. Glushko, who continued to
lead Russian rocket development until 1989.
In their youth, many important thinkers in space science were influenced by
Jules Verne, and various astronomy articles. They went on to dream
about living in space. But, their political leaders had other ideas.
Both the U. S. and the Russians realized the potential of rocketry as
a military weapon. They began experimental programs. The United States
started with high-altitude atmospheric sounding rockets, one of Goddard's early ideas.
Those types of studies are useful for many experiments.
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/Sounding....l?1079274801810
Later, a variety of medium- and long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles
were developed. These became the starting point of the U.S. space
program. Missiles such as the Redstone, Atlas, and Titan would eventually launch
astronauts into space.
In 1959, the Soviets launched a probe, Luna III. It got the first picture of the
dark side of the moon. A large crater they discovered was named after Tsiolkovsky.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/lo3_m121.gif
Tsiolkovsky and V.P Glushko
Tsiolkovsky understood that propulsion in space did not include the force or
acceleration of gravity. His basic calculations to achieve propulsion, though,
begin with liftoff, and then move to escape velocity, and finally
interplanetary motion.
They start with-
m=m_0e^{-v/v_1}
m is mass of an empty rocket without fuel or payload mass,
m_0 is mass of a rocket during lift-off,
v is rocket velocity and
v_1 is the velocity of escaping fuels.
His calculations never left Russia, but were independently discovered, abroad.
He understood the total weight of a rocket is dependent on the amount of propellant it must carry. But, increasing the propellant exhaust velocity decreases the amount of propellant mass required. This propellant exhaust velocity thus,
has special significance, and relates to another important quantity
called Specific Impulse.
Specific Impulse is formally defined as-
The engine thrust (pounds of force, or Newtons) divided by
the propellant mass flow rate (pounds of mass per second, or kilograms/sec).
It is how many seconds one pound of propellant produces one pound of thrust.
It is a useful criteria for evaluating the merits of a system.
For Liftoff-
If you multiply the Specific Impulse ......(seconds of thrust for one pound of fuel)
by the standard acceleration of gravity... {32 ft/sec^2} or {9.8 m/s^2}
-------------------------------
you get 'propellant velocity'........................... Propulsion Velocity
Today, the U.S. Space Shuttle has tanks of liquid hydrogen, whose propulsion
delivers a specific impulse of 450 seconds, and achieve an exhaust velocity
of 14,400 ft/s or 4,410 m/s. Even so, it must compromise, for higher
atmospheric pressures at liftoff cause flow seperation inside the
nozzle chambers, but work better at higher altitudes.
The challenge is to design an exhaust that changes shape with the
pressures around it. This is the principle behind an 'aerospike' engine.
It is inside out, with the flow external down the nozzle,
and a turbo-pump contributing other gases at the exit.
A new 'single-stage-to-orbit' vehicle is now in design, and would have
a permanent, adjustable engine. As pressure around drops, it could
expand the exhaust plume to compensate.
acceleration of gravity. His basic calculations to achieve propulsion, though,
begin with liftoff, and then move to escape velocity, and finally
interplanetary motion.
They start with-
m=m_0e^{-v/v_1}
m is mass of an empty rocket without fuel or payload mass,
m_0 is mass of a rocket during lift-off,
v is rocket velocity and
v_1 is the velocity of escaping fuels.
His calculations never left Russia, but were independently discovered, abroad.
He understood the total weight of a rocket is dependent on the amount of propellant it must carry. But, increasing the propellant exhaust velocity decreases the amount of propellant mass required. This propellant exhaust velocity thus,
has special significance, and relates to another important quantity
called Specific Impulse.
Specific Impulse is formally defined as-
The engine thrust (pounds of force, or Newtons) divided by
the propellant mass flow rate (pounds of mass per second, or kilograms/sec).
It is how many seconds one pound of propellant produces one pound of thrust.
It is a useful criteria for evaluating the merits of a system.
For Liftoff-
If you multiply the Specific Impulse ......(seconds of thrust for one pound of fuel)
by the standard acceleration of gravity... {32 ft/sec^2} or {9.8 m/s^2}
-------------------------------
you get 'propellant velocity'........................... Propulsion Velocity
Today, the U.S. Space Shuttle has tanks of liquid hydrogen, whose propulsion
delivers a specific impulse of 450 seconds, and achieve an exhaust velocity
of 14,400 ft/s or 4,410 m/s. Even so, it must compromise, for higher
atmospheric pressures at liftoff cause flow seperation inside the
nozzle chambers, but work better at higher altitudes.
The challenge is to design an exhaust that changes shape with the
pressures around it. This is the principle behind an 'aerospike' engine.
It is inside out, with the flow external down the nozzle,
and a turbo-pump contributing other gases at the exit.
A new 'single-stage-to-orbit' vehicle is now in design, and would have
a permanent, adjustable engine. As pressure around drops, it could
expand the exhaust plume to compensate.
A scienetific experiment...
...Seriously i would like to know,what is the biggest problem faced to day ,with space exploration.
I have created a few formula(maths) wich i would like to apply to these problems.
Thank you.
...Seriously i would like to know,what is the biggest problem faced to day ,with space exploration.
I have created a few formula(maths) wich i would like to apply to these problems.
Thank you.
The question might be asked in the context of what is the biggest
challenge for mankind, in regards to space.
There are three main reasons we are there
The first is to learn more about the world we live on.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/...s11-44-6689.jpg
The second is to better communicate with each other.
And the third is to insure the prosperity of the human race,
and hopefully, all God's creatures here at home.
We currently are comfortable in how the first two purposes operate,
but advancements will always occur. In regards to the latter,
there are three catagories. Scientific payloads, human transport,
and raw material.
I mentioned Specific Impulse. That is the most important
single piece of the puzzle. As wrote, a space-faring vehicle
that lifts off the earth, must use high power
A rocket moves and increases its velocity by
conserving momentum (mass multiplied by velocity) between
the mass and velocity of the expelled propellant and the mass and velocity
of the rocket.
In principle, either the velocity or mass of the propellant exhaust gas
could be varied to produce a given increase in the velocity of the
rocket (DV, "delta vee"). In many practical systems, however, the
velocity of the exhaust gas is fixed. For example, chemical exhaust
systems produce exhaust gases with a velocity of 3 to 4 kilometers
per second whereas electric-ion systems, which I will give a brief
overview to, may achieve exhaust velocities of more than 100 km/s.
Obviously, the higher the exhaust velocity, the less the mass of propellant
needed to achieve a given overall DV.
But, there are trade-offs. If you take the basics of a
rocket mission- fuel, power supply, science payload, you may assign
them values 100, 100, 10. The payload thus, is given little space to occupy.
If you take the same entities for an electric-ion propulsion system, you may
invert the numbers. The fuel becomes 10, the power supply remains 100,
and the science payload becomes 100.
Obviously, this applies to scientific probes, or robotic missions.
Matters become more complex as you add human passengers.
Space is a hostile environment, and shortening the mission, while
sustaining life, is essential.
If you further add the mix, by including transport of materials,
it seems obvious that a seperate mission craft is best for industrial or
habitat related elements.
There are sound reasons why solar sail transporters could satisfy some
degree of material transport on a large scale. I will later cover that, hopefully...
I would have to jump ahead to answer you. That, of course, would be only to
point you in a direction where you could exercise some efforts in mathematics.
I can not teach physics...
I have to go, but when I return, I will give you a name, and a project, and you
test your desires.
challenge for mankind, in regards to space.
There are three main reasons we are there
The first is to learn more about the world we live on.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/...s11-44-6689.jpg
The second is to better communicate with each other.
And the third is to insure the prosperity of the human race,
and hopefully, all God's creatures here at home.
We currently are comfortable in how the first two purposes operate,
but advancements will always occur. In regards to the latter,
there are three catagories. Scientific payloads, human transport,
and raw material.
I mentioned Specific Impulse. That is the most important
single piece of the puzzle. As wrote, a space-faring vehicle
that lifts off the earth, must use high power
A rocket moves and increases its velocity by
conserving momentum (mass multiplied by velocity) between
the mass and velocity of the expelled propellant and the mass and velocity
of the rocket.
In principle, either the velocity or mass of the propellant exhaust gas
could be varied to produce a given increase in the velocity of the
rocket (DV, "delta vee"). In many practical systems, however, the
velocity of the exhaust gas is fixed. For example, chemical exhaust
systems produce exhaust gases with a velocity of 3 to 4 kilometers
per second whereas electric-ion systems, which I will give a brief
overview to, may achieve exhaust velocities of more than 100 km/s.
Obviously, the higher the exhaust velocity, the less the mass of propellant
needed to achieve a given overall DV.
But, there are trade-offs. If you take the basics of a
rocket mission- fuel, power supply, science payload, you may assign
them values 100, 100, 10. The payload thus, is given little space to occupy.
If you take the same entities for an electric-ion propulsion system, you may
invert the numbers. The fuel becomes 10, the power supply remains 100,
and the science payload becomes 100.
Obviously, this applies to scientific probes, or robotic missions.
Matters become more complex as you add human passengers.
Space is a hostile environment, and shortening the mission, while
sustaining life, is essential.
If you further add the mix, by including transport of materials,
it seems obvious that a seperate mission craft is best for industrial or
habitat related elements.
There are sound reasons why solar sail transporters could satisfy some
degree of material transport on a large scale. I will later cover that, hopefully...
I would have to jump ahead to answer you. That, of course, would be only to
point you in a direction where you could exercise some efforts in mathematics.
I can not teach physics...
I have to go, but when I return, I will give you a name, and a project, and you
test your desires.
| QUOTE (swj20 @ Mar 18 2004, 04:59 AM) |
| I would have to jump ahead to answer you. That, of course, would be only to point you in a direction where you could exercise some efforts in mathmatics. I can not teach physics... I have to go, but when I return, I will give you a name, and a project, and you test your desires. |
Thanks
i belive we have talked about light,concerning Gravity.
anyway
i have a specific question.
In sience,has any human been able to alta Gravity.
and one more question,please dont find this a bit crazy..
..but i once saw a documentry on Area 51,now im not easely supprized in todays world,with any unexplained mystery.
but..i saw alot of advenced technologies,aparently its all been worked to come to light in about 2020AD.
my question is,do you belive that there is a diffrence to what we show people what we know or what we know but keep a secret.
what i mean is that most of the tech i saw here was very advanced level of what we are trying to acheav.
its very complicated to answer to two groups of people
first group;follow todays teaching in physics and all that.
second group;know about UFO propultion,and more.
please do give me afew test.becouse im tiered of talking about religion,to people who grew up not to belive,and to study and get rich is there only thought,how can we prosper here or earth when its all driven by peronal goals.
In the end we do know.its just all hidden up.
Im also supprized that you Swj20,have never talk about it...
..for some reson i think you know what im talking about..
..if you dont,please disregard these comments.
will wait for project..goody ..i love projects.
Thanks.
OOoohh 
I love that first picture. Anyway, I think that humanities greatest acheivement lies with art and music. Music and art I think would me humans distinguishing characteristic among other species in the galaxy. I wish I had more to say, it's hard for me to think without someone else in the conversation.
I love that first picture. Anyway, I think that humanities greatest acheivement lies with art and music. Music and art I think would me humans distinguishing characteristic among other species in the galaxy. I wish I had more to say, it's hard for me to think without someone else in the conversation.
Spartan- Are you in Aussieland? Because here is what I think.
After trying to locate information for you, on an astronaut and his project,
I came up with very little. His name is Franklin Chang-Diaz, and he
used to be associated with a university here in Texas, but funding
must be off. That may explain the absence of information.
The upshot is this- he wants to build a fusion powered spacecraft.
It would contain the atomic reaction inside of a magnetic field.
Heat, converted from this, would turn a gas propellant into a plasma,
or super-heated ionized exhaust.
Magnets which are used to contain atomic radiation fields are VERY HEAVY.
That adds mass to the space ship. The trick is to make powerful,
lightweight magnets. And, as far as fusion goes, that is another
hurdle. It liberates a large amount of raw energy, but is many years
down the road. In the mean time, lesser types of nuclear power can
provide small magneto-plasma drive engines. But to go to Mars,
man will need to get a version of this up and running.
My wish was to show you the relationship between mass, inertia, and
outerspace travel, and to do it using the closet thing we have to real
travel to places beyond the moon...However, the websites I looked for
are no longer there. I will keep trying to present my general views,
however. (He was interviewed not long ago on the ABC station, there.
The link is off, but if they fix it, you can hear him discuss his project)
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/incon/aud...112003_2856.ram
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/tx29.../changdiaz.html
I have an idea for you. I do not know your education level, or your
interests, etc. But, may I suggest this. Provided you live in Aus.,
why don't you join a local astronomy club? Or, even, get a part-time
job as general staff at a govt. funded astronomy organization.
You might be a gopher at first, but you could learn something,
and meet people with a common interest.
Here is the most basic approach. Find someone near you that sells
small telescopes. Call or visit their business. Go with a friend and talk
to them about amateur astronomy, and how to begin.
They can tell you of any group in your area.
1. If you want deeper sources, these guys have been involved with amateur
astronomy, and have Aus. govt. astronomy connections. One small step for Spartan, a giant leap for Spartankind...
http://www.astronomy.org.au/ngn/engine.php...0022&AID=100136
2. This man knows a lot about astronomy in Aus. Drop him a well-written
e-mail, be BRIEF, and ask about employment, or education for the
general public, or interest groups! That's a lot, I know.
marc.duldig@aad.gov.au
3. Swinburn University Astronomy Outreach. Again, a brief e-mail about
any opportunities for the general public, jobs, interest groups...
smaddison@swin.edu.au
After trying to locate information for you, on an astronaut and his project,
I came up with very little. His name is Franklin Chang-Diaz, and he
used to be associated with a university here in Texas, but funding
must be off. That may explain the absence of information.
The upshot is this- he wants to build a fusion powered spacecraft.
It would contain the atomic reaction inside of a magnetic field.
Heat, converted from this, would turn a gas propellant into a plasma,
or super-heated ionized exhaust.
Magnets which are used to contain atomic radiation fields are VERY HEAVY.
That adds mass to the space ship. The trick is to make powerful,
lightweight magnets. And, as far as fusion goes, that is another
hurdle. It liberates a large amount of raw energy, but is many years
down the road. In the mean time, lesser types of nuclear power can
provide small magneto-plasma drive engines. But to go to Mars,
man will need to get a version of this up and running.
My wish was to show you the relationship between mass, inertia, and
outerspace travel, and to do it using the closet thing we have to real
travel to places beyond the moon...However, the websites I looked for
are no longer there. I will keep trying to present my general views,
however. (He was interviewed not long ago on the ABC station, there.
The link is off, but if they fix it, you can hear him discuss his project)
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/incon/aud...112003_2856.ram
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/tx29.../changdiaz.html
I have an idea for you. I do not know your education level, or your
interests, etc. But, may I suggest this. Provided you live in Aus.,
why don't you join a local astronomy club? Or, even, get a part-time
job as general staff at a govt. funded astronomy organization.
You might be a gopher at first, but you could learn something,
and meet people with a common interest.
Here is the most basic approach. Find someone near you that sells
small telescopes. Call or visit their business. Go with a friend and talk
to them about amateur astronomy, and how to begin.
They can tell you of any group in your area.
1. If you want deeper sources, these guys have been involved with amateur
astronomy, and have Aus. govt. astronomy connections. One small step for Spartan, a giant leap for Spartankind...
http://www.astronomy.org.au/ngn/engine.php...0022&AID=100136
2. This man knows a lot about astronomy in Aus. Drop him a well-written
e-mail, be BRIEF, and ask about employment, or education for the
general public, or interest groups! That's a lot, I know.
marc.duldig@aad.gov.au
3. Swinburn University Astronomy Outreach. Again, a brief e-mail about
any opportunities for the general public, jobs, interest groups...
smaddison@swin.edu.au
| QUOTE (swj20 @ Mar 18 2004, 02:56 AM) |
| The challenge is to design an exhaust that changes shape with the pressures around it. |
Hi swj20,
Could you explain it more?
Thanks in advance.
I never thought I would mention about this, Poleshift, so I am
going to hopefully wade through! If you bear with me...
The space race began in the 1960s, and both NASA and the airforce
wanted to have safe re-entry vehicles that would land like an airplane.
Some designs at NASA were wingless, while the airforce wanted
more wing, than not. NASA began around 1962...
NASA took $30,000., and bought tubular steel, mahogany, and a
souped-up car. They went to a hot-rod shop in L.A (?) and had them
fix up a Pontiac Bonneville, so it could tow at high speeds. They went
out onto saltflats, and got the earliest prototype for the space shuttle
off the ground, at around 100 mph. The rest is history!
Designs were pursued for for these so-called 'Lifting Bodies',
which culminated in the Shuttle we know, today.
1963
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Movie/M2-.../EM-0020-02.mov
1969
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Movie/HL-.../EM-0014-03.mov
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/HL-...um/ECN-2203.jpg
1970s
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-2...um/ECN-2511.jpg
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-2...m/EC75-4643.jpg
In the late 1990s, bids went out for a vehicle to ultimately improve
upon the space shuttle. The initial idea was to improve the use of fuel,
safety and maintenance. NASA wanted a vehicle with a one week
turnaround, or less, if needed. It was to be pilotless, at first.
Lockheed-Martin Skunkworks probably will build it, using
Boeing-Rocketdyne engines called aerospikes. They call it 'Venturestar'.
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-3...C99-44921-1.jpg
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-3...D97-43938-4.jpg
In this matter, the secret is in the exhuast nozzle. First, look at the
amount of plume in this picture. It is not fair, to show it on the
pad, but the sheer volume will alert you to the amount of fuel used.
http://www.msfc.nasa.gov/news/photos/photo...es/99pp0956.jpg
Here is a new type in the works.
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/...ul/XRS2200.html
The basic difference is this- ambient pressures. Where is air pressure
greatest? Sea-level. As a matter of fact, most launches go near sea-level.
Some are even at sea~~ As they rise, pressure drops. Rocket engines
dependon a compromised design at their exhaust, to handle thrust.
In the frist place, fuel ignites into a narrow chamber, and is compressed.
Next, it enters a cone or bell shaped nozzle, the last chamber before exit.
The hot gas is allowed to EXPAND and push in
every direction < /\ \/ >. In theory, the upthrust is enough to lift a rocket,
hitting it like a punching bag! The other dynamics of gas movement both
contribute and impede effeciency, especially the upper side-portion.
But, imagine if the atmosphere outside the exhaust dampers the
expansion of gasses. It could reduce their pressure against the inside of
the bell or cone shaped exhaust nozzle. This is called 'flow seperation'.
There are about three ways to deal with this. A plug, inside the
nozzle, to force exiting gasses out against the nozzle;
the use of a flow director, that redirects to slowest part of the flow
back up, and directly into the inside top of the nozzle;
or an annular ring, on the exterior of the nozzle, that combines
with turbo-compressed gasses, to give maximum thrust.
It could be pitched, or modified, as needed in flight.
going to hopefully wade through! If you bear with me...
The space race began in the 1960s, and both NASA and the airforce
wanted to have safe re-entry vehicles that would land like an airplane.
Some designs at NASA were wingless, while the airforce wanted
more wing, than not. NASA began around 1962...
NASA took $30,000., and bought tubular steel, mahogany, and a
souped-up car. They went to a hot-rod shop in L.A (?) and had them
fix up a Pontiac Bonneville, so it could tow at high speeds. They went
out onto saltflats, and got the earliest prototype for the space shuttle
off the ground, at around 100 mph. The rest is history!
Designs were pursued for for these so-called 'Lifting Bodies',
which culminated in the Shuttle we know, today.
1963
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Movie/M2-.../EM-0020-02.mov
1969
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Movie/HL-.../EM-0014-03.mov
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/HL-...um/ECN-2203.jpg
1970s
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-2...um/ECN-2511.jpg
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-2...m/EC75-4643.jpg
In the late 1990s, bids went out for a vehicle to ultimately improve
upon the space shuttle. The initial idea was to improve the use of fuel,
safety and maintenance. NASA wanted a vehicle with a one week
turnaround, or less, if needed. It was to be pilotless, at first.
Lockheed-Martin Skunkworks probably will build it, using
Boeing-Rocketdyne engines called aerospikes. They call it 'Venturestar'.
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-3...C99-44921-1.jpg
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-3...D97-43938-4.jpg
In this matter, the secret is in the exhuast nozzle. First, look at the
amount of plume in this picture. It is not fair, to show it on the
pad, but the sheer volume will alert you to the amount of fuel used.
http://www.msfc.nasa.gov/news/photos/photo...es/99pp0956.jpg
Here is a new type in the works.
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/...ul/XRS2200.html
The basic difference is this- ambient pressures. Where is air pressure
greatest? Sea-level. As a matter of fact, most launches go near sea-level.
Some are even at sea~~ As they rise, pressure drops. Rocket engines
dependon a compromised design at their exhaust, to handle thrust.
In the frist place, fuel ignites into a narrow chamber, and is compressed.
Next, it enters a cone or bell shaped nozzle, the last chamber before exit.
The hot gas is allowed to EXPAND and push in
every direction < /\ \/ >. In theory, the upthrust is enough to lift a rocket,
hitting it like a punching bag! The other dynamics of gas movement both
contribute and impede effeciency, especially the upper side-portion.
But, imagine if the atmosphere outside the exhaust dampers the
expansion of gasses. It could reduce their pressure against the inside of
the bell or cone shaped exhaust nozzle. This is called 'flow seperation'.
There are about three ways to deal with this. A plug, inside the
nozzle, to force exiting gasses out against the nozzle;
the use of a flow director, that redirects to slowest part of the flow
back up, and directly into the inside top of the nozzle;
or an annular ring, on the exterior of the nozzle, that combines
with turbo-compressed gasses, to give maximum thrust.
It could be pitched, or modified, as needed in flight.
A rocket was flown for the first time last year, using a plug type
of device, in the nozzle, to control flow outward at all times,
against the nozzle. The picture is below of the Prospector Missile.
http://www.garvspace.com/
of device, in the nozzle, to control flow outward at all times,
against the nozzle. The picture is below of the Prospector Missile.
http://www.garvspace.com/
| QUOTE (swj20 @ Mar 19 2004, 06:18 AM) |
| I never thought I would mention about this, Poleshift, so I am going to hopefully wade through! If you bear with me... |
Thanks a lot for your professional posts.
Air pressure--that's why they want to launch space crafts on the moon.
My friend is conceiving a method to let the orbitor re-entry safer. He is shy and is hesitating how to let them know his idea soon and where to do wind tunnel test.
I want to draw a larger picture, concerning the space race, Soviet UFOs ,
and their strange belief that the U.S.space shuttle was a nuclear weapon.
After WWII, the Soviets deported many German workers,
back to the USSR, including around 175 rocket specialists.
The decision was made to build a ballistic missle with a
nuclear warhead to land on England, and the U.S.
They were taken to an island called Gorodomlya, 200 miles NW of
Moscow.
The missle the Russians wanted was eventually designed with the
help of the Germans. The R-3 rocket project was based on a new
engine, the RD 110, with trust of 120 tons. It was developed through
V. P. Glushko's bureau. The concept called for multiple large engines.
It was a major project that let Soviet missle technology move
leaps and bounds ahead.
and their strange belief that the U.S.space shuttle was a nuclear weapon.
After WWII, the Soviets deported many German workers,
back to the USSR, including around 175 rocket specialists.
The decision was made to build a ballistic missle with a
nuclear warhead to land on England, and the U.S.
They were taken to an island called Gorodomlya, 200 miles NW of
Moscow.
The missle the Russians wanted was eventually designed with the
help of the Germans. The R-3 rocket project was based on a new
engine, the RD 110, with trust of 120 tons. It was developed through
V. P. Glushko's bureau. The concept called for multiple large engines.
It was a major project that let Soviet missle technology move
leaps and bounds ahead.
However, the development of the R-3 ran into problems, when in
1950-51 test firings demonstrated that the engine's very large
combustion chamber was unable to survive its internal pressure
and temperatures.
Glushko tried to solve the problem. Adding multiple engines brought
higher risk of turbo pump failures, so he decided to multiply only
combustion chambers, feeding them with the help of a single
high-power turbo pump. It allowed higher trust with small combustion
chambers, and required no additional pumps. Still, the rocket seemed
too big for practical military use.
At this time, the Soviet rocket program was managed by Sergei Korolev.
Korolev, like many of his colleagues, went through Stalin's prisons,
but later participated in the search for rocket technology in occupied Germany.
He eventually headed the first Soviet rocket development center,
known today as the Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation Energia.
In 1952, Korolev canceled the R-3 missile and went ahead with
an even more ambitious design, a multi-stage intercontinental
rocket based on a concept of a multi-chamber engine. With its
multiple stages, their first ICBM was given a green light around 1954.
It was known as the R-7.
The R-7 was the biggest leap in the world's rocketry since German V-2.
Yet, it had became obsolete as a weapon before it started flying.
But, as a launch-vehicle it has continued in use almost half a century
after it was originally conceived. At the turn of the 21st century,
the R-7 can still deliver Russian manned spacecraft into orbit.
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/r-7.html?...l?1079941496475
The original R-7 ballistic missile during pre-launch processing, in 1957.
Also, the RD-108 engine powered the second stage of the R-7 rocket.
1950-51 test firings demonstrated that the engine's very large
combustion chamber was unable to survive its internal pressure
and temperatures.
Glushko tried to solve the problem. Adding multiple engines brought
higher risk of turbo pump failures, so he decided to multiply only
combustion chambers, feeding them with the help of a single
high-power turbo pump. It allowed higher trust with small combustion
chambers, and required no additional pumps. Still, the rocket seemed
too big for practical military use.
At this time, the Soviet rocket program was managed by Sergei Korolev.
Korolev, like many of his colleagues, went through Stalin's prisons,
but later participated in the search for rocket technology in occupied Germany.
He eventually headed the first Soviet rocket development center,
known today as the Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation Energia.
In 1952, Korolev canceled the R-3 missile and went ahead with
an even more ambitious design, a multi-stage intercontinental
rocket based on a concept of a multi-chamber engine. With its
multiple stages, their first ICBM was given a green light around 1954.
It was known as the R-7.
The R-7 was the biggest leap in the world's rocketry since German V-2.
Yet, it had became obsolete as a weapon before it started flying.
But, as a launch-vehicle it has continued in use almost half a century
after it was originally conceived. At the turn of the 21st century,
the R-7 can still deliver Russian manned spacecraft into orbit.
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/r-7.html?...l?1079941496475
The original R-7 ballistic missile during pre-launch processing, in 1957.
Also, the RD-108 engine powered the second stage of the R-7 rocket.
The Soviet missile development naturally required an open test area.
By decree in 1946, the Central Test Range for all jet-propelled weapons
was created in Kapustin Yar, Kazachstan. There was access by railroad,
proximity to industrial infrastructure in the city of Stalingrad (Volgograd)
on Volga River, and land availability.
The first launches happened there, using German style, liquid-fueled
engines. They eventually tested many military weapons,
including 18 liquid-fueled ICBMs, and one live nuclear weapon.
Kapustin Yar was remote, but at least, not completely isolated.
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/K_Yar.htm...l?1079932071953
Fueling of the A-4 (V-2) rocket in Kapustin Yar.
Soviet officials walk away after inspection, with the A-4 rocket ready
for launch on the background. And the A-4 being prepared.
By decree in 1946, the Central Test Range for all jet-propelled weapons
was created in Kapustin Yar, Kazachstan. There was access by railroad,
proximity to industrial infrastructure in the city of Stalingrad (Volgograd)
on Volga River, and land availability.
The first launches happened there, using German style, liquid-fueled
engines. They eventually tested many military weapons,
including 18 liquid-fueled ICBMs, and one live nuclear weapon.
Kapustin Yar was remote, but at least, not completely isolated.
http://www.geocities.com/swj20x2/K_Yar.htm...l?1079932071953
Fueling of the A-4 (V-2) rocket in Kapustin Yar.
Soviet officials walk away after inspection, with the A-4 rocket ready
for launch on the background. And the A-4 being prepared.
Three figures in Soviet nuclear space programs.
Igor Kurcahtov, nuclear scientist in charge of designing bombs.
Sergei P. Korolev, regarded as the father of the Soviet space program.
B. L. Vannikov, chief organizer within the nuclear program.
Igor Kurcahtov, nuclear scientist in charge of designing bombs.
Sergei P. Korolev, regarded as the father of the Soviet space program.
B. L. Vannikov, chief organizer within the nuclear program.
The 18 cruise missiles were like winged phantoms.
They were Russia's attempt at producing ICCM weapons.
Many engineers were trained in aeronautics, so they thought
wings were appropriate. Still, their weight was too much.
Called the Burya-Class missile, it was terminated in December, 1960.
The more powerful R-7 ICBM booster took their place in 1961, at Kapustin Yar.
They were Russia's attempt at producing ICCM weapons.
Many engineers were trained in aeronautics, so they thought
wings were appropriate. Still, their weight was too much.
Called the Burya-Class missile, it was terminated in December, 1960.
The more powerful R-7 ICBM booster took their place in 1961, at Kapustin Yar.
Hi Swj20
thanks for info,reson why i did not reply earlyer is couse i got suspended from forum for three days,haha some people dont like my views,
I know all this stuff.
I was hopeing for other info.
thank you.
oh ,to get a better nosel,is not to change the metal,but change the chemical(note basic brief)
to change the metal,means to change the whole concept...
...any way thank you.
i will get to that ,in a difrent method.
take care
thanks for info,reson why i did not reply earlyer is couse i got suspended from forum for three days,haha
some people dont like my views, I know all this stuff.
I was hopeing for other info.
thank you.
oh ,to get a better nosel,is not to change the metal,but change the chemical(note basic brief)
to change the metal,means to change the whole concept...
...any way thank you.
i will get to that ,in a difrent method.
take care
Spart-
O.K.- as far as relatavistic mechanics --lightwaves and gravity and particles--
I have not a clue as to who knows how to "alter" them. I know of no
published experiment that has tackled what we call gravity.
And if I understand the context of your question, you want to know
if it is possible to move matter or energy, and do it in a way that
is free from the constraints of gravity.
I do not think that is the only area you should wonder about.
If you want to travel from point A to point B, it is best to consider
reaction of matter and energy, and if that is not satisfactory,
one must consider time in an exotic fashion. I say that, because
one needs to move much faster than light to conquer the galaxies.
Question, if a person had a sophisticated laboratory, and a 'UFO'
flew overhead, would there be exotic new particles detected?
Would there be strange, but temporary exotic new particles emmited
into the environment? What would we learn from something like that?
To me, gravity is not but one aspect of one part of any equation
in acceleration of matter and energy, and has its role in the scheme
of things. For instance, aerodynamics, or aeronautics. It is both
a help and a hinderance, depending on one's objectives.
It is wonderful, and powerful, but defeating it may or not be the answer
to great questions.Yes, it would be of great benefit to science,
and society.
And perhaps conquering it will, in a related way, enable us to
conquer time and space.
More to think about. Perhaps exotic matter has exotic properties...
How many new elements are possible, beyond those known?
It would seem one would need to create new 'fundamental matter',
and we have generated a couple of thousand variants of atomic
nuclei inside of atom smashers, and who knows how long that
will continue? Maybe someday we will find a basic particle that
satisfies are current desires. Just some thoughts...
O.K.- as far as relatavistic mechanics --lightwaves and gravity and particles--
I have not a clue as to who knows how to "alter" them. I know of no
published experiment that has tackled what we call gravity.
And if I understand the context of your question, you want to know
if it is possible to move matter or energy, and do it in a way that
is free from the constraints of gravity.
I do not think that is the only area you should wonder about.
If you want to travel from point A to point B, it is best to consider
reaction of matter and energy, and if that is not satisfactory,
one must consider time in an exotic fashion. I say that, because
one needs to move much faster than light to conquer the galaxies.
Question, if a person had a sophisticated laboratory, and a 'UFO'
flew overhead, would there be exotic new particles detected?
Would there be strange, but temporary exotic new particles emmited
into the environment? What would we learn from something like that?
To me, gravity is not but one aspect of one part of any equation
in acceleration of matter and energy, and has its role in the scheme
of things. For instance, aerodynamics, or aeronautics. It is both
a help and a hinderance, depending on one's objectives.
It is wonderful, and powerful, but defeating it may or not be the answer
to great questions.Yes, it would be of great benefit to science,
and society.
And perhaps conquering it will, in a related way, enable us to
conquer time and space.
More to think about. Perhaps exotic matter has exotic properties...
How many new elements are possible, beyond those known?
It would seem one would need to create new 'fundamental matter',
and we have generated a couple of thousand variants of atomic
nuclei inside of atom smashers, and who knows how long that
will continue? Maybe someday we will find a basic particle that
satisfies are current desires. Just some thoughts...
| QUOTE (swj20 @ Mar 23 2004, 02:50 AM) |
| After WWII, the Soviets deported many German workers, back to the USSR, including around 175 rocket specialists. The decision was made to build a ballistic missle with a nuclear warhead to land on England, and the U.S. |
If they not ony designed and developed ballistic missle, but also had studied and had simulated the flying saucer, maybe it is different today. During WWII pilots encountered UFO's several times. UFO was almost invisible to radar. After WWII, why no country simulated a flying saucer? Or they did, but still hide it under table?
First of all, take the Soviet Union during the great nuclear arms race
of the Cold War, from the 1950s to the 1980s.
First, I am going to skip most of what I was going to write,
and just sketch it out.
I will try to use one map, even thought it lacks details.
The USSR, under archangels of death, like Korolev, began with a
nuclear test range in Kapustin Yar, in the south.
That is the first blue dot on the bottom left.
They needed more room, so they moved east, to Tyuratam.
That is the second blue dot, in Kazakhstan.
Then, after developing very long range missles, they decided
the quickest way to destroy the free world was over the North Pole.
So, they opened a third range in which to test, but mainly to deploy.
That was 400 miles north of Moscow, in Plesetsk.
That is the third blue dot, in the upper region.
It was a secret, naturally, and not admitted to for twenty years,
between 1962 and 1982. Of course, it was known.
Students, at Kettering school in England, had tried to study the
Russian secret program, by monitoring radio signals after launches.
Leave it to English school boys to learn about the Soviet Union's secrets...
We can assume that U.S. spy satellites finally confirmed it, but those
pictures were not distinct, like today.
Nonetheless, the Russians embarked on a deception plan that was twofold.
First, they attributed any sighting of a test launch rocket to UFOs.
They had stories printed in russian newspapers about UFO sightings
in and around an area near Plesetsk. Their favorite location was Karalia,
just east of Finland. That was west of Plesetsk, the missle base.
Stories with typical Russian creative imagination were dreamed up
and planted in newspapers.
This was done for another reason, as well. FOBS.
Fractional Orbit Bombardment Satellites were new weapons designed to
be sent over the South Pole, to America. They violated a treaty to
keep nuclear weapons out of space. The Soviets were launching them
from Tyuratam, and dumping them in the south Pacific, to conceal
the tests. Some speculate they actually put some unarmed testers
into polar orbit, and de-orbited them back into Kazakhstan.
I have seen CIA related documents on the internet that
discuss this.
It was another madness the Soviets had to hide- with UFO propoganda.
Again, this was early-to-mid-1960s. Just when there were such stories
about UFOs in Karalia.
There were also chemical warfare plants in Sverlodvsk, near Ykaterinburg.
Those are the yellow dot. They had 68 people die in a terrible
anthrax accident. The Russians started more UFO stories to divert attention.
These events took place in 1979, however. Nonetheless, it was a
combination of official denial and UFO stories for diversion.
The same tactics were used time and again.
But, they began to backfire.The soviet people began making routine
reports about UFOs. Whether or not what they were reporting was real,
or merely rocket launches, the fact that they began talking about
something superior to their own omnipotent rulers began to
worry the Kremlin. Kremlin bosses wanted no idols other than
themselves. They wanted their people to have the notion that Soviet
was supreme.
So- the Kremlin began ~denouncing~ UFOs!
In a big turn-around, there were stories appearing in official Soviet
newspapers saying spaceships from beyond Earth were heresy
to Soviet science! They were balancing one propaganda with
a counter-propaganda, just to keep things under control.
of the Cold War, from the 1950s to the 1980s.
First, I am going to skip most of what I was going to write,
and just sketch it out.
I will try to use one map, even thought it lacks details.
The USSR, under archangels of death, like Korolev, began with a
nuclear test range in Kapustin Yar, in the south.
That is the first blue dot on the bottom left.
They needed more room, so they moved east, to Tyuratam.
That is the second blue dot, in Kazakhstan.
Then, after developing very long range missles, they decided
the quickest way to destroy the free world was over the North Pole.
So, they opened a third range in which to test, but mainly to deploy.
That was 400 miles north of Moscow, in Plesetsk.
That is the third blue dot, in the upper region.
It was a secret, naturally, and not admitted to for twenty years,
between 1962 and 1982. Of course, it was known.
Students, at Kettering school in England, had tried to study the
Russian secret program, by monitoring radio signals after launches.
Leave it to English school boys to learn about the Soviet Union's secrets...
We can assume that U.S. spy satellites finally confirmed it, but those
pictures were not distinct, like today.
Nonetheless, the Russians embarked on a deception plan that was twofold.
First, they attributed any sighting of a test launch rocket to UFOs.
They had stories printed in russian newspapers about UFO sightings
in and around an area near Plesetsk. Their favorite location was Karalia,
just east of Finland. That was west of Plesetsk, the missle base.
Stories with typical Russian creative imagination were dreamed up
and planted in newspapers.
This was done for another reason, as well. FOBS.
Fractional Orbit Bombardment Satellites were new weapons designed to
be sent over the South Pole, to America. They violated a treaty to
keep nuclear weapons out of space. The Soviets were launching them
from Tyuratam, and dumping them in the south Pacific, to conceal
the tests. Some speculate they actually put some unarmed testers
into polar orbit, and de-orbited them back into Kazakhstan.
I have seen CIA related documents on the internet that
discuss this.
It was another madness the Soviets had to hide- with UFO propoganda.
Again, this was early-to-mid-1960s. Just when there were such stories
about UFOs in Karalia.
There were also chemical warfare plants in Sverlodvsk, near Ykaterinburg.
Those are the yellow dot. They had 68 people die in a terrible
anthrax accident. The Russians started more UFO stories to divert attention.
These events took place in 1979, however. Nonetheless, it was a
combination of official denial and UFO stories for diversion.
The same tactics were used time and again.
But, they began to backfire.The soviet people began making routine
reports about UFOs. Whether or not what they were reporting was real,
or merely rocket launches, the fact that they began talking about
something superior to their own omnipotent rulers began to
worry the Kremlin. Kremlin bosses wanted no idols other than
themselves. They wanted their people to have the notion that Soviet
was supreme.
So- the Kremlin began ~denouncing~ UFOs!
In a big turn-around, there were stories appearing in official Soviet
newspapers saying spaceships from beyond Earth were heresy
to Soviet science! They were balancing one propaganda with
a counter-propaganda, just to keep things under control.
A typical story from Karelia-
During a routine trip through the woods south of Karelia,
Vasili Bradski discovered on the banks of one of the many
lakes (frozen at this season) of this region a fairly large crater which
two days before had not been there. Unable to unravel the cause he
hurried to the nearest control point and sent a telegram to Leningrad: 'Inexplicable crater on the edge of a lake. Send specialists
and divers.' Although the following day was a Sunday it nonetheless
saw the start of an enquiry by six specialists flown out from
Leningrad who examined the lengthy gash on the lake's edge:
a hole about 30 m long, 15 wide and 3 deep. The crater was narrower
towards the bottom which itself was smooth, though around the edges
there were chaotic heaps of grass and soil. But the bottom of the hole
was as smooth as possible, as if someone had used a roller. As for the
soil excavated by the object there was no trace of it. The ice on the lake
nearby was largely broken and at that battered spot there were
ice-floes, but elsewhere the ice was undamaged. Black and crumbling
pellets were found on the bank which resembled buckwheat grains
these could be crushed between the fingers...etc...
And this-
Twenty-five witnesses in the region of Lake Onega, northeast of
Leningrad, saw a bluish green oval object the size of a jetliner
flying east silently at very high speed. It reportedly came so low that
it scraped the ground but flew up again. In the process, it broke
the ice, on the lake and left a trench fifty feet long and ten feet deep.
Sample pieces of the ice, when melted, left a residue of magnesium,
aluminum, calcium, barium, and titanium. A strange piece of metal
and tiny black grains, resistant to acid and heat, were also picked up.
They were composed of iron, silicon, sodium, lithium, titanium, and
aluminum. A joint civilian-military team investigated the incident...
And this, from 1990, in the Ukraine (south). Even though it is a later date,
it bears the hallmarks of Russian propaganda, which I still see in
Pravda and Tass news agencies...
In the morning of the 7th of January, on the Christmas day of 1990,
the weather was dull and raw. It was drizzling rain, a thaw had set in,
but Anatoli Yevdokimovich Vorontsov, an ardent fisherman and hunter,
decided to see rich fishing places on the Mzha river. Could the fitter
working in the local depot of Merefa, a small town in Kharkov region,
to imagine that his walk would become a part of the history of ufology?
About 9 o'clock in the morning Anatoli Yevdokimovich was nearing one
of the best fishing places on the river, where before a once-existent dam
the water was wider and deeper, up to 12 meters. Suddenly, in
total silence, he saw a strange reddish glow on a bank which was
like camp fire gleams, a funny thing in so damp weather.
But the wonder was waiting for him quite near. Turning past the dam,
Anatoli Yevdokimovich saw a reddish object hanging in the air over
the ice of the river in its widest expanse. The disk-shaped object,
about 30 meters in diameter, hovered, its bottom just above bushes
and top almost reaching the tops of trees.
Ten or fifteen minutes after the beginning of the observation the UFO
instantly soared high above the trees and stopped hovering. Now the
man
noticed a large round patch of open water in the ice. A second or two
after the object flew away in the direction of the village of Kolesniki;
as it did so, a blast of wind shook the tops of willows, some of them
breaking with crackling. But for the round gap in the ice, there would
have
been no trace of the occurrence. It was also remarkable that a disc of
ice of about 20 meters in diameter emerged slowly from under water
and occupied the round gap, exactly fitting. Anatoli Yevdokimovich
spared no efforts to examine broken willow tops and the field, and he
saw the following: the whole water-meadow with remnants of mown grass
was burnt by something. The burnt strips represented arcs of a large
radius and were almost as deep as the ground. Where a small
haystack had been, near a road, outside the burnt zone, the investigator
found a dark burnt spot on the ground...
These stories are cracked corn, as far as I can see.
The Soviet Union was engaged in spending every last penny they had
on burying their country's best work- underground.
Does that sound like a reasonable thing to do if you possess
UFO quality technology?
I think not. At least, the Soviets did not have that. If they did,
they would have destroyed America, England, France, and maybe China.
That is my opinion.
An excerpt from a CIA memo I got with FOIA, dated 1964.
They surmise, incorrectly, that the Soviets would not deploy FOBS.
In fact, the FOBS were sent into test orbits, from Tyuratam,
against prior treaty agreement with the U.S. The CIA corrected
themselves, two years later. I have read conflicting reports
as to whether or not FOBS re-entered the atmosphere, after one
test orbit. Some tests were made to head south, and hit the
Pacific Ocean. But some are said to have circled the globe,
going south to north, and if they were seen coming in over the
arctic north, heading into Russia, they might have been attributed
to UFOs.
The same thing happened in 1967, with the Soviets testing 'mobile ICBMs',
in Plesetsk, near Karelia. They were violating treaty agreements.
They had numerous mobile-launch failures and denied everything.
They were exposed by U2 photos to have 200 missiles under camo-nets.
Had they not been in official UFO denial in their newspapers, in 1967, they
probably would have blamed it all on UFOs again...
in Plesetsk, near Karelia. They were violating treaty agreements.
They had numerous mobile-launch failures and denied everything.
They were exposed by U2 photos to have 200 missiles under camo-nets.
Had they not been in official UFO denial in their newspapers, in 1967, they
probably would have blamed it all on UFOs again...
Below is a picture of some Russian actors. The actors, some of whom
were real soldiers, were hired by a couple of young American
film makers, in 1997. They wanted to capitalize on the fakeumentary
made in 1995, regarding alien corpses at Roswell. They hired a
woman in Moscow, who assisted in getting period uniforms together.
The problem was obvious to Russians. She gave officer belts to the
enlisted soldiers. And she hired some rather stiff actors.
It is also reported the 'UFO' was plastic molded. It blew about
in the wind, so it was fixed to trees. No damage to the trees, though!
This film was originally attributed to Svedrlovsk, and later recycled as
yet another film shot in Karelia. Despite these stories, this type of
hype is the best we get from Russia. Fake films, made by americans,
riding the coattails of older government propaganda.
The fact remains, the Russians were fools to pit themselves against the
U.S., England, and France. They could have joined NATO, and helped
contain the Chinese. I have read the sorry reasoning by their
eminent scientists, as to why they needed to 'deal with the U.S. monopoly',
in nuclear missiles. The fact is, they may know plutonium, but they are
the most mind-manipulated and socially paraniod people ever dominated,
controlled by a cadre of brainwashers called the Politburo-Presidium.
I paid for these excerpts. 5-7 MB
http://www.ufocasebook.com/members/crash2.avi
http://www.ufocasebook.com/members/crash3.avi
http://www.ufocasebook.com/members/crash4.avi
An interesting insiders opinion, from whom I learned of this film.
Takes a minute to open his link...
http://borshurinov.narod.ru/uftnt/tnt2.htm
were real soldiers, were hired by a couple of young American
film makers, in 1997. They wanted to capitalize on the fakeumentary
made in 1995, regarding alien corpses at Roswell. They hired a
woman in Moscow, who assisted in getting period uniforms together.
The problem was obvious to Russians. She gave officer belts to the
enlisted soldiers. And she hired some rather stiff actors.
It is also reported the 'UFO' was plastic molded. It blew about
in the wind, so it was fixed to trees. No damage to the trees, though!
This film was originally attributed to Svedrlovsk, and later recycled as
yet another film shot in Karelia. Despite these stories, this type of
hype is the best we get from Russia. Fake films, made by americans,
riding the coattails of older government propaganda.
The fact remains, the Russians were fools to pit themselves against the
U.S., England, and France. They could have joined NATO, and helped
contain the Chinese. I have read the sorry reasoning by their
eminent scientists, as to why they needed to 'deal with the U.S. monopoly',
in nuclear missiles. The fact is, they may know plutonium, but they are
the most mind-manipulated and socially paraniod people ever dominated,
controlled by a cadre of brainwashers called the Politburo-Presidium.
I paid for these excerpts. 5-7 MB
http://www.ufocasebook.com/members/crash2.avi
http://www.ufocasebook.com/members/crash3.avi
http://www.ufocasebook.com/members/crash4.avi
An interesting insiders opinion, from whom I learned of this film.
Takes a minute to open his link...
http://borshurinov.narod.ru/uftnt/tnt2.htm
Equally, something can be said in regards to UFOs
and missile technology that is less skeptical.
UFOs have appeared interested in nuclear-weapons facilitiies.
Notice the Russians almost never mention the two in the same breath.
In the U.S., on at least two occasions, they visited and interfered with
Minuteman ICBMs near Malmstrom Air Force Base, in Montana;
and at least once they appeared near Las Vegas, at Nellis AFB.
Nellis does not divulge its mission, other than being an
Air Warfare Center.
On the morning of March 16, 1967, glowing, disk-shaped UFOs
shut down two wings of Minuteman missiles, at Malstrom AFB.
'Echo' Wing lost all ten of its missiles during the encounters,
while nearby Oscar Wing lost most of its missiles. This was
puzzling to investigators because the missiles were designed
to be entirely independent of each other. Military records show the
events were a grave concern at Strategic Air Command headquarters.
UFO activity was reported in Montana newspapers at the time,
yet, details about the Minuteman incidents were successfully
covered up for several decades.
In late 1975, UFOs returned to the area surrounding Malmstrom AFB,
repeatedly hovering over and interfering with ICBM facilities.
This was a major story in Montana at the time and received
extensive coverage in regional newspapers and other media.
The evident interest of the UFOs in the ICBM sites was well known
and reported locally. Cascade County Deputy Sheriff Keith Wolverton
wrote a book,and further details were uncovered through
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits. Air Force records
are said to show that UFO activity also occurred at other military bases
across the northern part of the United States during the same period.
Video from Nellis AFB ranging camera, designed to track anything
in the air. This was on part of the Groom Lake facility. I do not
know if this was related to any shutdown at the base.
http://www.ufocasebook.com/UFO_Nellis_AirBase.mpeg
Also, do not meander around Groom Lake.
and missile technology that is less skeptical.
UFOs have appeared interested in nuclear-weapons facilitiies.
Notice the Russians almost never mention the two in the same breath.
In the U.S., on at least two occasions, they visited and interfered with
Minuteman ICBMs near Malmstrom Air Force Base, in Montana;
and at least once they appeared near Las Vegas, at Nellis AFB.
Nellis does not divulge its mission, other than being an
Air Warfare Center.
On the morning of March 16, 1967, glowing, disk-shaped UFOs
shut down two wings of Minuteman missiles, at Malstrom AFB.
'Echo' Wing lost all ten of its missiles during the encounters,
while nearby Oscar Wing lost most of its missiles. This was
puzzling to investigators because the missiles were designed
to be entirely independent of each other. Military records show the
events were a grave concern at Strategic Air Command headquarters.
UFO activity was reported in Montana newspapers at the time,
yet, details about the Minuteman incidents were successfully
covered up for several decades.
In late 1975, UFOs returned to the area surrounding Malmstrom AFB,
repeatedly hovering over and interfering with ICBM facilities.
This was a major story in Montana at the time and received
extensive coverage in regional newspapers and other media.
The evident interest of the UFOs in the ICBM sites was well known
and reported locally. Cascade County Deputy Sheriff Keith Wolverton
wrote a book,and further details were uncovered through
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits. Air Force records
are said to show that UFO activity also occurred at other military bases
across the northern part of the United States during the same period.
Video from Nellis AFB ranging camera, designed to track anything
in the air. This was on part of the Groom Lake facility. I do not
know if this was related to any shutdown at the base.
http://www.ufocasebook.com/UFO_Nellis_AirBase.mpeg
Also, do not meander around Groom Lake.
| QUOTE (swj20 @ Mar 24 2004, 01:13 PM) |
| The Soviet Union was engaged in spending every last penny they had on burying their country's best work- underground. Does that sound like a reasonable thing to do if you possess UFO quality technology? I think not. At least, the Soviets did not have that. If they did, they would have destroyed America, England, France, and maybe China. That is my opinion. |
Agree. They are creepy because they don't have real one and the copy failed.
Thanks a lot for your offer. Let me buy you a beer.
On the other side, we are lucky. If they had a real one and terrorist got one from black market, this planet would have rather than 9.11, body bombs, terror bombs...
Could you tell me why UFO is invisible to radar?
Poleshift,
Reports of URRs (unidentified radar returns) have occured since the
beginning of the use of radar.
Firstly, radar (radio and detection ranging) for aircraft tracking and
air traffic management has probably been most common in
the 2.7 to 3 GHz (gigahertz) range. Typically, microwaves are sent
out by an antenna.Those microwaves will move in a straight line
until refracted (bent), reflected, or absorbed.
Hard targets are those that generate a solid image on a
cathode ray screen. Images that are less distinct can be
reflections from softer targets, such as flocks of birds,
swarms of insects, rain and snow.
In the case of weather signatures, aircraft detection radar requires
very unusual conditions to create signal returns based on
temperature inversions. That is, to say that an aircraft
radar had a object on its screen, and that object was the result
of a temperature inversion in the atmosphere would require
a temperature difference in the air layers of between 9-18 degrees.
These conditions do not occur every day, and attempts to
explain UFOs on radar as a result of weather have fallen
short many times,
Solid targets indicate a surface which is perpendicular to
a transmitted signal wave; solid targets can also result
from reflected echoes that eventually find their way
back to a recieving antenna (a parabolic, directional antenna).
To ask why an object fails to return an echo signal, one should
also understand that return signals can be different than those
first sent out, and they can be so degraded as to not even register.
So, some signals can be polarized from the source,
For instance, the intial microwave can be controlled to be
polarized, that is, to have its waves all aligned, rather than
mixed at right angles in a random way.
A polarized signal will interact with its target, and possibly
return the with same polarisation, or even another polarisation.
For example-
Horizontal signal-horizontal return (H-H).
Vertical signal-vertical return (V-V)
H-V, V-H, as well on the polarized signal-echo. Even circular polarisation
of the signal can be sent, or can be retutned.
By modulating the frequency of the signal, and changing the
polarisation, a radar operator can make certain determinations
about a target, such as conditions of its surface, or other knowledge.
Radar can be installed on the ground, at sea, or on an aircraft.
Radar on an aircraft can be in front, or in the rear, to give a pilot
a complete view of his surroundings.
Hot, ionized carbon in the exhuast of jet engines is both a thermal
agent, and may possibly be dectected using radar, although I do
not know. Heat seeking missles follow the infra-red, but perhaps
radar operators could identify large enough disturbances of ionized
gas, plasma or otherwise, near a flying object. Many new stealth planes
try to cool the exhaust with outside air, and to hide the exit
with verticle tail pieces.
http://www2.acc.af.mil/library/FA22/FA221/...00270PR_300.jpg
http://www2.acc.af.mil/library/FA22/FA222/FA-22-8.jpg
Another technique is to change the shape of raised surfaces in such a way,
as to sawtooth their dimensions, thus breaking up radar hits.
http://www2.acc.af.mil/library/FA22/FA222/...FA-22-4.bmp.jpg
http://www2.acc.af.mil/library/FA22/FA221/...00164PR_300.jpg
http://www2.acc.af.mil/library/FA22/FA221/...00164PR_300.jpg
One vulnerability is the joint of exposed rear ailerons.
http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/photos/021...O-9999G-004.jpg.
Do so-called UFOs have these weaknesses, sometimes?
During the post WWII era, there were some notable radar returns
from unidentified sources. For instance, in Japan, on November 6, 1948,
Air Force operators tracked two strangely maneuvering objects for
sixty five minutes. It remains a mystery.
In 1950, Naval officers at Key West reported two glowing objects
had been tracked by radar men as they streaked above the air station.
They were also seen by pilots and ground men, flying at a height too
great for attempted pursuit.
Radar operators are trained to identify the speed of tracked objects,
and UFOs have been regestered between hovering, and even speeds
of 10-12,000 mph. Such extreme events can not be accounted for by
simple anwers using weather conditions or birds, especially complicated
moving targets.
In order not to be seen by radar, an object would need to be transparent to,
absorb, or refract (bend) or reflect away radar signals. If a radar signal
strikes a surface, and if that signal is reflected at an angle beyond the
threshold of the recieving antenna, that signal will escape detection.
Thus, flat, direct targets are ideal. But even a round surface can have
some section exposed for a good signal.
As to what may also affect microwave signals, materials embedded
into the surface of a target can reduce radar return. It has been
known for fifty years that iron particles, suspended in an elastic matrix,
or even paint, can behave as a resistor. When magnetized and
configured in a manner, in can create around 377 ohms resistance,
impede, and essentially dissipate an incoming radar signal.
Surfaces inside of planes and on the decks of ships are are many
times coated with a rubber material, like neoprene, which has embedded
iron or some suitable resistor substance. This protects surfaces from
high energy microwave damage, and reduces clutter information
on the display screen.
Radar is a sophisticated technology, and always has been complex
to operate. There are echoes that return unwanted information,
and it sometimes gets misinterpreted. But, not for long.
Especially if there are multiple radars in a locality, reporting
the same unidentifiable signatures. It gets even more complex
with visual confiramation and numerous witnesses independently
observing a UFO.
I have wondered myself about the effects of certain ionized field
effects, and what they may do to radar. The Russians claim to
have a lasar that would emit pulses foward of a military aircraft,
and it in turn would ionize a small quantity of atmospheric atoms (N, O),
which would spread out along the jet, as it moved forward.
A charged tailpiece would capture the drift ions, and thus envelop
the aircraft with this thin field. The claim is that it bends, or refracts
incoming radar.
If you think about it, it is like the old machine guns on a bi-plane.
To shoot through the propellor, a timing mechanism was connected
to the gun. Aircraft rely on their own radar for protection.
If you block radar, you send none out, either, and become blind. So,
a burdensome construct of computer software and
relays become needed to get down to mirosecond bursts of
outgoing radar, with sensors to recieve the approriate return.
It can be done, using gas filled antennas, which turn on and off
like flash-flourecent bulbs.
The problem is in the ion stream around the plane, per the russian claim.
If you travel too fast, what happens to the stream? If you cannot
generate a really powerful retention field, you lose the ions like
any other airstream.
But, UFOs have been reported to have glowing plasma-like
or photoionizing fields around them, yet they were seen on radar.
Again, it depends on the polarisation and strength of any
radar signal, as to its possible interaction with an electro-
magnetic, electro-static, or some ionized field, or a even a
more intensly ionized plasma induced ion field. Plasmas are heavily
ionized, and while typically associated with high electron or ion energy
they can and are produced at room temperature. They could,
if dense enough, deflect, bend, and scatter a short photon wave
like a microwave.
So, a microwave radar has 3 polarized aspects-
horizontal, vertical, and circular. And various energy levels.
And, the number of pulses sent out can vary per minute.
These, the distance to the target, its composition, and shape of its
surfaces will affect the outcome of any return signal.
To add to detection possibilities, one may look at other signatures,
as well. For instance, heat or thermal emissions can be tracked.
And, non-radar reflecting surfaces may be identified, nonetheless,
using 'ladar', or laser energy.
Another method of detection is called passive disturbance.
This is when you set up a grid of radio towers, and broadcast
certain radio frequencies (1-2 GHz), so as to set up a network
of detectors. A disturbance in the field would identify a flying intruder's
position. They should be detected even if they elude radar.
As to intentions, and allowing oneself to be locked onto
with a radar signal, and one's abilitites to control
that every minute, at both ends- becomes conjecture.
I wager some unusual radar events have happened.
Even outright jamming of radar stations has been reported.
That is not safe for either civilian or military airports, but
it has been reported a few times, regarding UFO events.
http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/photos/021...O-9999G-007.jpg
http://www.randf.com/ramapriaas.html
The microwave portion of the Electromagnetic Spectrum is quite large,
relative to the visible, and there are several wavelength ranges or bands commonly used in radar imaging. Usually, only a portion of that is used
in airport radar, but military or civilian aircraft can probably emit a
range of signal from 2.7 - 15 GHz.
from unidentified sources. For instance, in Japan, on November 6, 1948,
Air Force operators tracked two strangely maneuvering objects for
sixty five minutes. It remains a mystery.
In 1950, Naval officers at Key West reported two glowing objects
had been tracked by radar men as they streaked above the air station.
They were also seen by pilots and ground men, flying at a height too
great for attempted pursuit.
Radar operators are trained to identify the speed of tracked objects,
and UFOs have been regestered between hovering, and even speeds
of 10-12,000 mph. Such extreme events can not be accounted for by
simple anwers using weather conditions or birds, especially complicated
moving targets.
In order not to be seen by radar, an object would need to be transparent to,
absorb, or refract (bend) or reflect away radar signals. If a radar signal
strikes a surface, and if that signal is reflected at an angle beyond the
threshold of the recieving antenna, that signal will escape detection.
Thus, flat, direct targets are ideal. But even a round surface can have
some section exposed for a good signal.
As to what may also affect microwave signals, materials embedded
into the surface of a target can reduce radar return. It has been
known for fifty years that iron particles, suspended in an elastic matrix,
or even paint, can behave as a resistor. When magnetized and
configured in a manner, in can create around 377 ohms resistance,
impede, and essentially dissipate an incoming radar signal.
Surfaces inside of planes and on the decks of ships are are many
times coated with a rubber material, like neoprene, which has embedded
iron or some suitable resistor substance. This protects surfaces from
high energy microwave damage, and reduces clutter information
on the display screen.
Radar is a sophisticated technology, and always has been complex
to operate. There are echoes that return unwanted information,
and it sometimes gets misinterpreted. But, not for long.
Especially if there are multiple radars in a locality, reporting
the same unidentifiable signatures. It gets even more complex
with visual confiramation and numerous witnesses independently
observing a UFO.
I have wondered myself about the effects of certain ionized field
effects, and what they may do to radar. The Russians claim to
have a lasar that would emit pulses foward of a military aircraft,
and it in turn would ionize a small quantity of atmospheric atoms (N, O),
which would spread out along the jet, as it moved forward.
A charged tailpiece would capture the drift ions, and thus envelop
the aircraft with this thin field. The claim is that it bends, or refracts
incoming radar.
If you think about it, it is like the old machine guns on a bi-plane.
To shoot through the propellor, a timing mechanism was connected
to the gun. Aircraft rely on their own radar for protection.
If you block radar, you send none out, either, and become blind. So,
a burdensome construct of computer software and
relays become needed to get down to mirosecond bursts of
outgoing radar, with sensors to recieve the approriate return.
It can be done, using gas filled antennas, which turn on and off
like flash-flourecent bulbs.
The problem is in the ion stream around the plane, per the russian claim.
If you travel too fast, what happens to the stream? If you cannot
generate a really powerful retention field, you lose the ions like
any other airstream.
But, UFOs have been reported to have glowing plasma-like
or photoionizing fields around them, yet they were seen on radar.
Again, it depends on the polarisation and strength of any
radar signal, as to its possible interaction with an electro-
magnetic, electro-static, or some ionized field, or a even a
more intensly ionized plasma induced ion field. Plasmas are heavily
ionized, and while typically associated with high electron or ion energy
they can and are produced at room temperature. They could,
if dense enough, deflect, bend, and scatter a short photon wave
like a microwave.
So, a microwave radar has 3 polarized aspects-
horizontal, vertical, and circular. And various energy levels.
And, the number of pulses sent out can vary per minute.
These, the distance to the target, its composition, and shape of its
surfaces will affect the outcome of any return signal.
To add to detection possibilities, one may look at other signatures,
as well. For instance, heat or thermal emissions can be tracked.
And, non-radar reflecting surfaces may be identified, nonetheless,
using 'ladar', or laser energy.
Another method of detection is called passive disturbance.
This is when you set up a grid of radio towers, and broadcast
certain radio frequencies (1-2 GHz), so as to set up a network
of detectors. A disturbance in the field would identify a flying intruder's
position. They should be detected even if they elude radar.
As to intentions, and allowing oneself to be locked onto
with a radar signal, and one's abilitites to control
that every minute, at both ends- becomes conjecture.
I wager some unusual radar events have happened.
Even outright jamming of radar stations has been reported.
That is not safe for either civilian or military airports, but
it has been reported a few times, regarding UFO events.
http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/photos/021...O-9999G-007.jpg
http://www.randf.com/ramapriaas.html
The microwave portion of the Electromagnetic Spectrum is quite large,
relative to the visible, and there are several wavelength ranges or bands commonly used in radar imaging. Usually, only a portion of that is used
in airport radar, but military or civilian aircraft can probably emit a
range of signal from 2.7 - 15 GHz.
As for eliminating those detectable airleron joints-
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/p...s/dvd-223-4.jpg
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/p...s/dvd-226-5.jpg
http://video.boeing.com:8080/ram/events/lb...lb03235_200.ram
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/p...s/dvd-223-4.jpg
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/p...s/dvd-226-5.jpg
http://video.boeing.com:8080/ram/events/lb...lb03235_200.ram
Great! Wonderful! Awesome!
http://www.exn.ca/Stories/2003/03/04/52.asp
The Avrocar's smooth shape made it inherently stealthy: Its lack of sharp edges made it a more difficult target for enemy radar.
>>But even a round surface can have some section exposed for a good signal.
A radar uses Doppler effect to detect flying object's speed. If round object (for example Avrocar) is quickly spinning (not rotating)and quickly forwards(like hurricane, tornado, earth), will Doppler effect still happen? Will the transmitting radar receive the echo signal from the swift spinning flying object? Or other radars will receive the echoes?
I was confused.
>>UFOs have been regestered between hovering, and even speeds
of 10-12,000 mph.
We only have Mach 7 so far. Even if we had Mach 12, what is it for? It's far beyond human body limit. Can not carry us to Sirius but a robot, i.e., robot can travel in universe, we want and can build travel machine but are not allowed! Maybe the small green aliens are robot!? Or superman?
What is human body limit, Mach 7 or 9?
>>I have wondered myself about the effects of certain ionized field
effects, and what they may do to radar.
...But, UFOs have been reported to have glowing plasma-like
or photoionizing fields around them, yet they were seen on radar.
...They could, if dense enough, deflect, bend, and scatter a short photon wave
like a microwave.
When space shuttle re-enters, since its speed higher than sound (how many Mach?), and it doesn't head into vacuum, plasmas are produced. I'm wondering at that moment if it disappeared on the radar screen.
>>Another method of detection is called passive disturbance.
Is it not commonly used? Only a few master this technology?
>>I wager some unusual radar events have happened.
Even outright jamming of radar stations has been reported.
That is not safe for either civilian or military airports, but
it has been reported a few times, regarding UFO events.
Could you explain more or give me the source?
Thanks in advance.
http://www.exn.ca/Stories/2003/03/04/52.asp
The Avrocar's smooth shape made it inherently stealthy: Its lack of sharp edges made it a more difficult target for enemy radar.
>>But even a round surface can have some section exposed for a good signal.
A radar uses Doppler effect to detect flying object's speed. If round object (for example Avrocar) is quickly spinning (not rotating)and quickly forwards(like hurricane, tornado, earth), will Doppler effect still happen? Will the transmitting radar receive the echo signal from the swift spinning flying object? Or other radars will receive the echoes?
I was confused.
>>UFOs have been regestered between hovering, and even speeds
of 10-12,000 mph.
We only have Mach 7 so far. Even if we had Mach 12, what is it for? It's far beyond human body limit. Can not carry us to Sirius but a robot, i.e., robot can travel in universe, we want and can build travel machine but are not allowed! Maybe the small green aliens are robot!? Or superman?
What is human body limit, Mach 7 or 9?
>>I have wondered myself about the effects of certain ionized field
effects, and what they may do to radar.
...But, UFOs have been reported to have glowing plasma-like
or photoionizing fields around them, yet they were seen on radar.
...They could, if dense enough, deflect, bend, and scatter a short photon wave
like a microwave.
When space shuttle re-enters, since its speed higher than sound (how many Mach?), and it doesn't head into vacuum, plasmas are produced. I'm wondering at that moment if it disappeared on the radar screen.
>>Another method of detection is called passive disturbance.
Is it not commonly used? Only a few master this technology?
>>I wager some unusual radar events have happened.
Even outright jamming of radar stations has been reported.
That is not safe for either civilian or military airports, but
it has been reported a few times, regarding UFO events.
Could you explain more or give me the source?
Thanks in advance.
Poleshift,
Now, I want to tell you this. I may have just had a sighting.
Health is off, not subject for here, but it is a driver, nonetheless.
Anyway.been going out lately saw one tonight.
First satars were out stars.light no
was not dark, yet.
saw mars, but was on wrong place. It then got a cloud around it instantly.
cloudless sky. it turned off its glow. then it came on then it faded and
fell like a leaf ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~down a bit.
The cloud came and went, just vaporized in 3-4 seconds.
It manifested and at the same time, the object dimmed.
Then the cloud vaporized, the glow returned, looking like hot bright Mars.
Then it started skipping, like a rock.
no other stars around it. then it skipped across about twenty degrees or arc
or a handspread. It was excititng. it went at irregular motion go stop go stop.
not in straight line, but fits and starts.
then it got out of sight, at high altitude.
It was first at 20,000 feet or so. I compare that to cruise altitude of commercial jets, and it was lower.
Anyway, I live in Texas, in a major area. If I saw what I think I saw,
it sparks my imagination to wonder once again...............................
Here is flash from the past, a project we had..................................
lasers and all.
Now, I want to tell you this. I may have just had a sighting.
Health is off, not subject for here, but it is a driver, nonetheless.
Anyway.been going out lately saw one tonight.
First satars were out stars.light no
was not dark, yet.
saw mars, but was on wrong place. It then got a cloud around it instantly.
cloudless sky. it turned off its glow. then it came on then it faded and
fell like a leaf ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~down a bit.
The cloud came and went, just vaporized in 3-4 seconds.
It manifested and at the same time, the object dimmed.
Then the cloud vaporized, the glow returned, looking like hot bright Mars.
Then it started skipping, like a rock.
no other stars around it. then it skipped across about twenty degrees or arc
or a handspread. It was excititng. it went at irregular motion go stop go stop.
not in straight line, but fits and starts.
then it got out of sight, at high altitude.
It was first at 20,000 feet or so. I compare that to cruise altitude of commercial jets, and it was lower.
Anyway, I live in Texas, in a major area. If I saw what I think I saw,
it sparks my imagination to wonder once again...............................
Here is flash from the past, a project we had..................................
lasers and all.
seems a UFO off the radar screen.
If telescope equipped with HD digital camera or webcam, if you like, you can share this event with us.
I'm wondering if there is such telescope with HD webcam, to let observer watch the sky on screen ( as big as you can). A smart software will give you an alarm if it detects a moving object. If so, you can watch the night sky at any time. With HD, you can tell us what you found.
If telescope equipped with HD digital camera or webcam, if you like, you can share this event with us.
I'm wondering if there is such telescope with HD webcam, to let observer watch the sky on screen ( as big as you can). A smart software will give you an alarm if it detects a moving object. If so, you can watch the night sky at any time. With HD, you can tell us what you found.
| QUOTE (swj20 @ Apr 10 2004, 03:00 AM) |
| Here is flash from the past, a project we had.................................. lasers and all. |
Sorry swj, I forgot the fact: no camera is as good as human eye to watch night sky.
One day when a man and a robot landing on a planet in the nearest solar system, the man will see the night sky clearly while the robot not. They will have no method to send the viewing of the night sky to earth.
Someone thinks AI (artifical intelligence) will dominate the earth. From this point of view, it's a joke.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.