broberfett said:
A few years ago the Pentagon was talking about a space bomber.
A few years ago, the Pentagon was talking about a quick 6-month, in-and-out operation to topple Hussein's regime in Iraq, followed by a welcoming ceremony on the part of the Iraqis. Talk is cheap.
Incidentally, when was the Pentagon talking about space bombers? Do you have any sources for this?
It would take off from the ground, fly into space and drop bombs. Most US fighters can drop a 2,000 pound bomb. A bomber drops a bunch of bombs.
What would be the purpose of dropping bombs from space?
We use this shitty space shuttle that blows up all the time when we have the tech for a space bomber.
We do? Where? Do you have any evidence for it?
If by "tech for a space bomber," you mean we could design a shuttle that could lift off and drop things from orbit, then yes, we "have the tech." That's nothing new.
There just wouldn't be any point in building something like that, because regular airplanes can do the same job, a lot easier and for a lot less money.
There are also old rumors of a spy plane called Aurora and corresponding seismic shock waves headed in a path towards Groom lake. The SR-71 is old junk. How fast does the new thing go?
There are also rumors about UFOs over Groom Lake and aliens kept in containment. Doesn't make it true.
Even if there is a secret spy plane, how is that relevant? Secrety spy planes have nothing to do with deep space missions. Flying in the air really fast and quiet is a totally different ballgame.
If NASA ran Christopher Columbus' voyage, his ships would still be going in circles just outside port and it would cost billions and billions. Then they would get this great idea to build a trillion dollar raft for 3 people out in the water and a ship could visit it for a billion bucks each time, but only one American would ever be on board and mostly the Russians would run it. They would run a few experiments and further the cause of going in circles.
Is it NASA's fault that no one - politicians OR the public - is interested enough to give them decent funding? Space exploration is expensive. Nobody wants to foot the bill, so they use what scraps they have.
I've thought for a longtime that there are two space programs-one public and one private. The private program has the good stuff and is probably 50 years advanced beyond what we see(70s garbage).
Why would the government mantain two separate space programs? Why would they waste money on a useless one? Why would they keep a "good" program secret? What evidence do you have that there are
A) Two space programs
and
B) One of which is 50 years more advanced than the other?
If it exists, then why haven't we seen evidence for "technology 50 years more advanced" in any aspect of our lives?
o we have the Tech to send a Probe to Alpha Centauri? if so why have we not sent it yet, it's our closest neighbor at 4.3 Lys away,but at top Ion drive speeds it might not be feasable.
