Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Re: FWD: To the moon and beyond: NASA's Exploration Systems Architecture Study, 630 pages, 2006

3 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted

Pat Flannery

unread,
Jun 7, 2009, 9:26:50 AM6/7/09
to

OM wrote:
> ....From Wikileaks:
>
> http://wikileaks.org/wiki/To_the_moon_and_beyond:_NASA%27s_Exploration_Systems_Architecture_Study%2C_630_pages%2C_2006
>

Great find! I'll download it in the next couple of days. Is the "Eagle"
in there?

Pat

Allen Thomson

unread,
Jun 7, 2009, 9:55:10 PM6/7/09
to
On Jun 7, 8:26 am, Pat Flannery <flan...@daktel.com> wrote:

> Great find!

Indeed. It will be a useful resource for a lot of things. I like the
reliability section in particular.

Thanks to OM and Wikileaks.

Message has been deleted

David Spain

unread,
Jun 8, 2009, 6:47:43 AM6/8/09
to
OM wrote:
> ....From Wikileaks:
>
> http://wikileaks.org/wiki/To_the_moon_and_beyond:_NASA%27s_Exploration_Systems_Architecture_Study%2C_630_pages%2C_2006
>
> OM

This thing has a very annoying watermark across each page. Sometimes obscuring details of important diagrams.
Is there anything like this that is watermark free?

Dave

Jonathan

unread,
Jun 12, 2009, 12:20:15 PM6/12/09
to

"OM" <o...@sci.space.history> wrote in message
news:qh1m25p2ka1dthafg...@4ax.com...

> ....From Wikileaks:
>
> http://wikileaks.org/wiki/To_the_moon_and_beyond:_NASA%27s_Exploration_Systems_Architecture_Study%2C_630_pages%2C_2006
>
> OM


Funny it should be leaked at this time.

What does that tell everyone about the chances
of going back to the Moon?

I'm astonished so few here admit the obvious. That
manned space flight and NASA needs a new goal
and reason for existing.

What should the new direction be?
Pure science, or global problems?
Military or civilian? What?

Because times like now are an opportunity
for a complete redesign and endless possibilities.

>
> --
>
> ]=====================================[
> ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
> ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
> ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
> ]=====================================[
>
>
> ======================================= MODERATOR'S COMMENT:
> Approved, but in the future, please provide more context so us moderators
> don't have to figure out what you're posting. GdM
>

======================================= MODERATOR'S COMMENT:
Let's focus on the technical side of this discussions here. GdM

0 new messages