Interesting pic of Space Shuttle Atlantis on shuttle mover

[hellokeith]

Check out the tracks on that thing!!!

NASA FTW. 😀

 

[Kadarin]

That thing is an engineering marvel.

However, I think the Space Shuttle program should be scrapped, and replaced with something cheaper that does the job better.

 

[Shawn]

Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:

IIRC it's 8 gpm

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
That thing is an engineering marvel.

However, I think the Space Shuttle program should be scrapped, and replaced with something cheaper that does the job better.

Absolutely it's an engineering marvel.


As far as it being scrapped, it's in the process of that right now. I believe NASA's goal is to get a vehicle that can go back and forth between space and earth by 2020.

 

[NickelTitanium]

Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:

IIRC it's 8 gpm

gallons per meter perhaps. :laugh:


according to wiki
"The crawler burns 150 US gallons of diesel oil per mile (350 L/km);"

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:

IIRC it's 8 gpm

gallons per meter perhaps. :laugh:


according to wiki
"The crawler burns 150 US gallons of diesel oil per mile (350 L/km);"

eh, I actually made a typo...meant 80. I was in the process of trying to find the wiki, but couldn't remember what they called it.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:

IIRC it's 8 gpm

gallons per meter perhaps. :laugh:


according to wiki
"The crawler burns 150 US gallons of diesel oil per mile (350 L/km);"

Hah, I though 8 gallons per mile sounded really optimistic...

 

[Minerva]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:

IIRC it's 8 gpm

gallons per meter perhaps. :laugh:


according to wiki
"The crawler burns 150 US gallons of diesel oil per mile (350 L/km);"

Hah, I though 8 gallons per mile sounded really optimistic...

Sounds like a bargain. How many pizzas would it take to feed enough ATOT'ers to pull it with rope? 😛

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

you can thank congress from raping NASA every year through budget cuts. can't design a new spacecraft without billions in funding.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)

You guys are talking about two different things.

The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. It's just big iron. We could have built that in the 1930's.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)

You guys are talking about two different things.

The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.

Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.

And even if he is talking about the space shuttle, show me any other truely viable transport system developed by any other country that is superior. And by viable, I mean it is economically and technologically possible as a standard means of use.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)

You guys are talking about two different things.

The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.

Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.

My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?

They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.

 

[NickelTitanium]

All I am saying is that the U.S. should be much further along. Just because we are only one of three countries that have a true space program doesn't mean we should slow down...

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)

You guys are talking about two different things.

The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.

Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.

My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?

They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.

ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.

 

[Minerva]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)

You guys are talking about two different things.

The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.

Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.

My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?

They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.

ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.

The crawler itself is only half of the engineering. Take a trip to KSC and check out the pathway itself, how it had to be built to carry the load. :Q

 

[Bootprint]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)

You guys are talking about two different things.

The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.

Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.

My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?

They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.

ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.

Just because it's huge doesn't make it that complex. Look at the company that designed and built it, Marion Power Shovel Company. They didn't create any new technology for it.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
All I am saying is that the U.S. should be much further along. Just because we are only one of three countries that have a true space program doesn't mean we should slow down...

open your wallet there Daddy Warbucks...

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: Bootprint

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.

It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)

You guys are talking about two different things.

The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.

Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.

My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?

They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.

ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.

Just because it's huge doesn't make it that complex. Look at the company that designed and built it, Marion Power Shovel Company. They didn't create any new technology for it.

actually, if you read any of the history, they did quite a bit of advancement on current technology. It had lots of problems early on with the bearings being insufficient to carry the weight.

and I still don't see you showing us any similar engineering feats of the 1930s.

 

[TheDro]

God our space shuttles look pretty ghetto now... NASA needs a bigger budget.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: TheDro
God our space shuttles look pretty ghetto now... NASA needs a bigger budget.

civilization is being ruined by the Sci-Fi Channel...

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats


ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.

You simply don't understand, do you? Using the same technology and making it bigger doesn't make something complex.

There was no technical hurdle building the crawler, the technical hurdle is in building the rockets. The reason you don't see more giant machines is because they're very job-specific. Most giant machines are built where they're going to be used, and they stay in the relative area.

It didn't take a bunch of rocket scientists to build this.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats


ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.

You simply don't understand, do you? Using the same technology and making it bigger doesn't make something complex.

There was no technical hurdle building the crawler, the technical hurdle is in building the rockets. The reason you don't see more giant machines is because they're very job-specific. Most giant machines are built where they're going to be used, and they stay in the relative area.

It didn't take a bunch of rocket scientists to build this.

nope, but it's still an engineering marvel, and it's not from the 1930s. and you are confusing an engineering marvel with a technological leap. Two different things.

A bridge or building can be an engineering marvel, but may not exhibit any real technological advancement. You are the one confused.