3 ms·
"NASA's" yea right. This screams military tech.
by soup10 11y ago
"NASA's" yea right. This screams military tech.
- tomswartz07 11y agoNot to split hairs, but NASA and the military are, and throughout their history, very much intertwined. There's a reason that the first astronauts were fighter pilots.
- castis 11y agoSerious question, would anyone else have been more qualified for those positions?
- Crito 11y agoHe picked a bad example, because honestly you are right. A better example might be how the DoD influenced/compromised the design of the Space Shuttle. The only reason it had those big-ass wings was so that it could fly polar orbit missions for the military. It never actually flew any of those missions, but it did fly a few classified military missions: STS-51-C, STS-51-J, STS-27, STS-28, STS-33, STS-36, STS-38, and a few others.
- whyaduck 11y agoI won't argue that there isn't cross-pollination between NASA and the military, but if you're looking for a test pilot for your new, high-performance aircraft (or, say, rocket), you'd be hard pressed to find a more qualified candidate than a military test pilot.
- nerdy 11y agoFrom the Nazi V-2 team to the US X-37 there is a long history of considerable inter-connectivity. Not just people but technology, manufacturing & testing methods, etc. It's a more significant than cross-pollination to me.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- DanBC 11y agoThat reasoning was used for years to exclude women from the astronaut programme, even when women outperformed men in NASA's own test pilot tests. (Astronauts were drawn from the test pilot pool. Women could not become test pilots because test pilots were military pilots, and military pilots were not female.) http://history.nasa.gov/printFriendly/flats.html http://history.nasa.gov/printFriendly/flats.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_13 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_13
- mturmon 11y agoNope, you're wrong. It's not really military. This particular project has been funded for many years by DHS. It's based on radar tech that has been used in many past space-based contexts. For synthetic-aperture-radar-based mapping of Earth's topography from space (http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm/ http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm/), for radar science (e.g., looking beneath the surface of Mercury using the 70-m Goldstone radar, http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/mercury-20070503_prt.htm http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/mercury-2007...), and for precisely retrieving the Doppler shift of receding spacecraft for science and communications. (Source: I know some of the JPL radar group.) There is military-funded work that goes on at NASA, but this particular radar tech is not such an example. For (much) more: https://radar.jpl.nasa.gov/index.cfm https://radar.jpl.nasa.gov/index.cfm
- madengr 11y agoIt's probably pulsed UWB, not SAR as that requires a moving aperature: http://www.timedomain.com/news/wall.php http://www.timedomain.com/news/wall.php UWB has been around for 20+ years, and IIRC there was a big patent dispute back in the late 90's. https://books.google.com/books?id=6_XVg-nX9qgC&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=uwb+time+domain+patent&source=bl&ots=9J3p85pZFv&sig=arWdLbskzZwJvHTAWWIpkhr2hqc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=deVLVf7MAojvtQXV54C4Dg&ved=0CEwQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=uwb%20time%20domain%20patent&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=6_XVg-nX9qgC&pg=PA7&lpg=PA...
- mturmon 11y agoYes, certainly not SAR. My point is there is a big heritage of space-based radar expertise the linked project is drawing on, and I was trying to choose examples that people might be familiar with. SRTM was a main source for the DEMs that people use in GIS.