NASA Can't Build a Heavy Lift Launcher

Dude, you are such a good troll. I freaking love you.

Whatever you say, Al.

Your mental programming by NASA is why we won't achieve anything with space flight in the near future. They would have us believe that it is all about speed and it is not.

We're gonna need to reach AT LEAST Mach 22 if we're going to put submarines in space.

Moron.

Yes so they can be like a big slingshot

Two words: Orbital Velocity.

I bet enlisted person got beat up every day at school- by girls.

At Mach 22 I'm sure...

while on a conveyor belt....

Gay girls, or just gays, even.

...or "Superman Returns"?

Yeah! This ain't rocket scie...

Never mind.

Enlisted person is the most stupid person I have ever met, either on the inernet or in reality.

Aren't you the submarine spaceship guy?

I would have sworn it was impossible to top the "submarines into space" proposition for complete idiocy. I would have sworn it.

I would have been wrong.

The depths of human ignorance have not yet been plumbed...

Apollo applications also included plans for more advanced lunar landers. A a flying vehicle to replace the rover, plans for a long term base and a space station above the moon. Fucking Nixon canceled it all...

It's not the atmosphere you're fighting. God I'm a lawyer and even I know that.

I think EP fails to understand the gravity of the situation.

I have learned over the years that EP fails to understand most things.

Watch this post rocket over EP's head.

Well, to be fair, it is a weighty subject.

Ever read about the idea of the space elevator that if constructed could lift people into space at something less than mach22?

Yes. Kim Stanley Robinson featured it in the Mars Trilogy, and Civ IV has it as a wonder for the Space Race victory option. What of it?

You do realize that even at the top of a space elevator your total velocity reaches the equivalent of Mach 22 anyway.

More than that for geosynchronous orbits.

...by otters...

It gets Skin down sometimes.

[yt=See?]4EAPqfGneI8[/yt]

...of the ass...

And so you also have no clue how the physics of the space elevator works.

Insults are a poor substitute for answers. NASA is far from what it once was, decades ago they took us to moon, I don't see a repeat performance anytime soon. When Saturn Vs were used it was darn near the optimum environment for developing space travel. It was a new endeavor spurred on by imagination, curiosity, and most of all an international competition. Yet even in its heyday only thirteen Saturn V rockets were launched. That's it, and nobody really cared when they went out of service.

Could today's NASA replicate the Saturn V? Maybe. Is there funding and public support for replicating decades old technology? I doubt it. Could today's NASA improve upon the Saturn V? Another maybe. Keep in mind [GOOGLE]Wernher von Braun[/GOOGLE] (Nazi background and all) was on staff and designed each Saturn V rocket. Is there a modern day equivalent? Nope.

Point being I have no faith in NASA (or any government program that's been on the downward slide for decades) and I don't understand why questioning NASA's current ability merits derision. Seems you're saying NASA can do anything it's done before and do it better.

I disagree.

That's like saying the navy couldn't build a sail boat because the inventor of the sail boat has been dead for a thousand years.