[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: US DOD FIREBALL RELEASE
- To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
- Subject: Re: US DOD FIREBALL RELEASE
- From: "E.P. Grondine" <epgrondine@yahoo.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:46:30 -0700 (PDT)
- Old-X-Envelope-To: <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
- Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 18:49:14 -0400 (EDT)
- Resent-From: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"TOiDiC.A.z0B.oDId1"@mu.pair.com>
- Resent-Sender: meteorite-list-request@meteoritecentral.com
Ron -
> Then sounds we are talking different reports, as the NEO report I'm
> referring to came out in 1995.
Nope. The Representatives kept on talking about the
Shoemaker Report, and claimed to have received it in
1993. I'm sure not going to try to straighten them out. You want to
volunteer?
>Also, note that instructing NASA to
> put more resources into an area is not the same as >funding the
program.
Yes, but generally, when the Representatives "suggest" something to a
federal employee they expect some kind of action to be taken.
> Exactly. The asteroid detection with telescopes is the cheap part ($5
> million/year). The actual deflection with nuclear weapons is the
expensive
> part (~400 million per launch, billions per year). There is no real
> need to do the expensive part until you've found an actual threat,
an asteroid
> or comet on an impact course with Earth. But unfortunately in the
real
> world today, we are finding that the cheap part, the telescope survey,
> is being underfunded. Doesn't make any sense to fund the
> expensive practice missions, and continue to leave the cheap part
underfunded.
>
Agree 100% with you on that. Right now NASA is looking to spend at
least $800 million on the small probes and their launch vehicles, at
the same time they propose to give the telescope search $16-17
million.
Go figure!
Ed
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com