NASA general discussion thread

[Mr.dobsonian]

I was saddened by the fact that there was no thread do talk about all things NASA, instead there was many different threads on more specific topics so I thought I might start my own 

However this likely won't go very far as I'm not a well known member of the community.

Other NASA threads:
 

Spoiler

 

Now  who's excited for LUCY? I certainly am!

https://www.planetary.org/video/lucy-mission-trajectory
 

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by Mr.dobsonian

[Mr.dobsonian]

New cloud system to be implemented into earth-moon satellites

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/nasa-turns-to-the-cloud-for-help-with-next-generation-earth-missions 

[Mr.dobsonian]

The parker solar probe will preform another flyby of Venus a few hours after the launch of LUCY, this flyby will send the probe around a million kilometres closer to the sun than before and after two additional venus flybys the parker solar probe will eventually reach within  6.4 million kilometres of the sun in late 2024.
If you want to read more head to this link: https://blogs.nasa.gov/parkersolarprobe/2021/10/

If this thread fails to get people discussing NASA related things I will switch it to NASA news thread and will do weekly updates.

Edited October 14, 2021 by Mr.dobsonian

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

15 hours ago, Mr.dobsonian said:

et people discussing NASA related things I will switch it to NASA news thread and will do weekly updates.

looking forward to it!

[MKI]

I keep track of what NASA does, but unlike a conglomerate of "startup space companies" all chasing SpaceX, NASA still does things pretty slow and steady. (Or in some cases horribly delayed)

 

Looking forward to JWST actually getting off the pad (please dear god get off the pad!) as well

[Mr.dobsonian]

1 hour ago, MKI said:

I keep track of what NASA does, but unlike a conglomerate of "startup space companies" all chasing SpaceX, NASA still does things pretty slow and steady. (Or in some cases horribly delayed)

 

Looking forward to JWST actually getting off the pad (please dear god get off the pad!) as well

The advantage of NASA taking things slowly is that they get it right the first time, spaceX takes a different approach by doing lots and lots of tests before reaching a final design.

Also yes the launch of the JWST is very exciting!

Edited October 15, 2021 by Mr.dobsonian

[kops said]

I just hope Artemis 1 launches as scheduled next month. SLS has broken my heart too many times.

[RCgothic]

57 minutes ago, kops said said:

I just hope Artemis 1 launches as scheduled next month. SLS has broken my heart too many times.

It won't. There's definitively too much still to do. Small chance of December. Far more likely next year.

[Gargamel]

The problem with coverall threads is that when a couple detailed discussions pop up, the discussion gets quite muddled.  We keep starlink separate from SpaceX for just this reason.  We try to keep discussions about specific missions in their own threads, with a link in the mission index stickied at the top of the page.     I've split off the LUCY discussion into it's own thread.  

I'll also add this thread for general NASA discussion and the LUCY thread to the index.

[Mr.dobsonian]

8 hours ago, Gargamel said:

The problem with coverall threads is that when a couple detailed discussions pop up, the discussion gets quite muddled.  We keep starlink separate from SpaceX for just this reason.  We try to keep discussions about specific missions in their own threads, with a link in the mission index stickied at the top of the page.     I've split off the LUCY discussion into it's own thread.  

I'll also add this thread for general NASA discussion and the LUCY thread to the index.

Alright, sorry about this.

[Gargamel]

1 hour ago, Mr.dobsonian said:

Alright, sorry about this.

No need to be sorry!   We didn’t have a general NASA thread that I was aware of.   Glad you started one! 

[NFUN]

edit the first post to have a list of the existing threads for ongoing nasa projects 

[Mr.dobsonian]

7 hours ago, NFUN said:

edit the first post to have a list of the existing threads for ongoing nasa projects 

Well I'll try but no guarantees on all of them

[Gargamel]

9 hours ago, Mr.dobsonian said:

Well I'll try but no guarantees on all of them

Just steal the links from the stickied index at the top of the forum. 

[Mr.dobsonian]

On 10/16/2021 at 4:03 AM, kops said said:

I just hope Artemis 1 launches as scheduled next month. SLS has broken my heart too many times.

 

On 10/16/2021 at 5:03 AM, RCgothic said:

It won't. There's definitively too much still to do. Small chance of December. Far more likely next year.

I think it will launch in december-janurary, considering it's fully stacked now.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-fully-stacked-for-moon-mission-readies-for-artemis-i

[Beccab]

36 minutes ago, Mr.dobsonian said:

 

I think it will launch in december-janurary, considering it's fully stacked now.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-fully-stacked-for-moon-mission-readies-for-artemis-i

The launch has already slipped to february

[Mr.dobsonian]

1 hour ago, Beccab said:

The launch has already slipped to february

And I'm sure it won't be delayed anymore (unless the cause is something like weather) because the SLS is pretty much ready

[Meecrob]

I'd hesitate to relate how "ready"  a rocket looks externally vs. how ready it actually is to fly. You can see Orion being stacked, but you cannot see how mature their software is for example.

[Beccab]

8 hours ago, Mr.dobsonian said:

And I'm sure it won't be delayed anymore (unless the cause is something like weather) because the SLS is pretty much ready

The launch has slipped to february like, yesterday

[Gargamel]

Let's direct Artemis specific discussion towards the sizable thread we have on this already

 

[Shpaget]

A media briefing on UFOs is about to start

Quote

This media briefing is a discussion about the report published by the unidentified anomalous phenomena independent study team we commissioned in 2022.

The team’s report aims to inform us on what possible data could be collected in the future to shed light on the nature and origin of UAPs. Briefing participants include:
· NASA Administrator Bill Nelson
· Nicola Fox, associate administrator, Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters in Washington
· Dan Evans, assistant deputy associate administrator for research, NASA’s Science Mission Directorate
· David Spergel, president, Simons Foundation and chair of NASA’s UAP independent study team

The UAP independent study team is a counsel of 16 community experts across diverse areas on matters relevant to potential methods of study for UAP. We commissioned the nine-month study to examine UAP from a scientific perspective and create a roadmap for how to use data and the tools of science to move our understanding of UAP forward. Right now, the limited high-quality observations of UAP make it impossible to draw scientific conclusions from the data about the nature of such events.

More info on the independent study team, including frequently asked questions: https://science.nasa.gov/uap

 

[Gargamel]

And from what I read, they said exactly what you’d expect:   “There’s almost definitely life out there, but we have no proof they’ve visited.  More research is needed.”  

[kerbiloid]

Afair, they assigned a boss, but didn't reveal his/her/its name.

At least, is he/she/it a human?

I mean, biologically.

[cubinator]

46 minutes ago, Gargamel said:

And from what I read, they said exactly what you’d expect:   “There’s almost definitely life out there, but we have no proof they’ve visited.  More research is needed.”  

The report itself lays out several concrete recommendations on how to use existing and already-planned infrastructure, such as Earth-observing satellites and aviation data, to gather actual scientific data on unidentified phenomena, and recommends implementation of a more standardized reporting system.
 

I am imagining something similar to the meteor and satellite reentry reporting forms, one of which I once used myself to report an unusual group of high-altitude objects I couldn't identify.

Edited September 14, 2023 by cubinator

[SunlitZelkova]

Jacques Vallee created an interesting table showing the prospects of a report actually being made, circa the 1970s.

Category 1: Nothing more than an unusual looking series of lights but not immediately apparent as a UFO | Probability of Report: 1 in 10 | Reported to: Anyone

Category 2: “ball of fire” clearly something unusual but still not quite a UFO | Probability of Report: 3 in 10 | Reported to: Police

Category 3: Bizarre looking aircraft | Probability of Report: 4 in 10 | Reported to: Military [usually by phoning the local Air Force base]

Category 4: Bizarre looking aircraft lands | Probability of Report: 2 in 10 | Reported to: local UFO kook

Category 5: Something steps out of the bizarre looking aircraft upon landing | Probability of Report: 1 in 10 | Reported to: close family only

Category 6: The craft shines a beam of light on you and gives you and epiphany | Probability of Report: almost nil | Reported to: no one

Category 7: After the experience, what seems to have taken place over the course of 30 minutes actually took 4 hours (“reality gap”) | Probability of Report: almost nil | Reported to: the event is not even consciously registered by the witness

I think a problem with “UAP” research is that it ignores a couple facts-

1. No matter what the government does to distance it from UFOs (you know, the connotations of conspiracy geeks and such) UAP are UFOs.

2. UFOs have a huge stigma around them. In the 20th century when they were first reported it primarily pertained to disbelief in academia, but nowadays it is clearly a sore subject because of the nut jobs it attracts.

Because of this stigma, I highly doubt they are going to get a good volume of reports to accurately gauge how widespread the phenomena is. Nowadays, UFO reports in Category 3 are treated like Category 5.

It’s a real shame they don’t take advantage of and learn from previous attempts to study UFOs, like Project Blue Book and the Condon Report. Not necessarily taking the results of those efforts as something to build off of, but reviewing their data gathering methods and seeing what could be improved.

In addition, I think a lot could be gleaned from the philosophy surrounding them from authors like Jacques Vallee, categorizing them as a religious phenomena of sorts rather than saucer men from Mars. UFO investigations should also involve folklorists and psychologists, not just physicists.

Radars and satellites alone are not going to solve this mystery.