• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Cull all IT Contractors (and PMs) under 35

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by HairyArsedBloke View Post
    Er, wot?

    I thought they were going back to non-reusable capsules thingys. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but it's not a 'new shuttle'.

    I thought that a new design programme was underway and that NASA would be working with the Ruskies to launch using Soyuz vehicles in the interrim.

    I might be wrong though.....
    Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death.

    Patience is something you admire in the driver behind you and scorn in the one ahead.

    Comment


      #22
      When's Concorde coming back?
      Speaking gibberish on internet talkboards since last Michaelmas. Plus here on Twitter

      Comment


        #23
        So to summarise - its only the West where exciting space adventures seem to have stalled - the Indians, Chinese and Russians are all ploughing ahead?

        Seems about right.
        Hard Brexit now!
        #prayfornodeal

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by sasguru View Post
          So to summarise - its only the West where exciting space adventures seem to have stalled - the Indians, Chinese and Russians are all ploughing ahead?

          Seems about right.
          Bring back the cold war and MAD.

          Ah the Good OLD Days when people were INSANE.

          None of this international co-operation
          Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death.

          Patience is something you admire in the driver behind you and scorn in the one ahead.

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by BlackenedBiker View Post
            I thought that a new design programme was underway and that NASA would be working with the Ruskies to launch using Soyuz vehicles in the interrim.

            I might be wrong though.....
            If anyone gives a frak: linky
            How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.

            Follow me on Twitter - LinkedIn Profile - The HAB blog - New Blog: Mad Cameron
            Xeno points: +5 - Asperger rating: 36 - Paranoid Schizophrenic rating: 44%

            "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to high office" - Aesop

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by MrMark View Post
              When's Concorde coming back?
              I saw that Concorde programme on TV last night; such a shame that among all the make believe money that's been printed to rescue our mad banking system there wasn't just a tiny fraction available to keep Concorde in the air long enough to develop a worthy successor. It remains one of the greatest technological achievements in human history, but was killed by politics and bean counters.
              And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by BlackenedBiker View Post
                Ummmmmmmm, what about

                The international space station
                The Shuttle
                The new Shuttle - in development
                The Hubble Space telescope
                The Large Binocular Telescope
                The LHC
                The Phoenix Mars Mission

                All of these have been achieved in the time since the Mercury and Apollo programmes.

                And the next generation will take our species to the edge of the solar system.

                We, as a species, are moving at the rate that is unsurpassed in known species development.

                Don't believe me, just think how annoying you find it waiting for your TomTom (other satnav systems available) to load up...........grrrrr. Now think about your Commodore 64 and how long that took to load donkey kong.

                Now that is progress.....
                You're absolutely right; your examples are brilliant pieces of technology. But my point isn't that we're incapable of doing these things. It's more about the perception among public, politicians and businesspeople of what constitutes a good use of money. It's linked to my theory that economists and bankers have no idea what to do with money. For the price of saving a couple of high street banks, techies could have given us a fleet of supersonic airliners to take all the Olympic athletes to Kennedy airbase, a fleet of Saturn V rockets to take them into space and hold the Olympics on the moon. Oh, and we'd throw in an Internet for free so they could send e-mails home. OK, it's a bit of an exaggeration (or is it?) but my point is that I think techies are better at managing and investing money than the people who are paid to do so. Who would you rather give umpty gazillion pounds? Economists or engineers?
                And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
                  It remains one of the greatest technological achievements in human history, but was killed by politics and bean counters.
                  Wrong. It was killed because it didn't make money.

                  HTH
                  Hard Brexit now!
                  #prayfornodeal

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
                    Who would you rather give umpty gazillion pounds? Economists or engineers?
                    Politician: "I have umpty gazillion pounds of taxpayers' money to burn. What will you do with it?"

                    Engineer: "Spend it on inventing new, shiny toys to make everybody happy."

                    Financier: "Give you 1% and piss the rest against the wall".

                    What would the politician do?
                    My all-time favourite Dilbert cartoon, this is: BTW, a Dumpster is a brand of skip, I think.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by sasguru View Post
                      Wrong. It was killed because it didn't make money.

                      HTH
                      It did ultimately make money for BA, and it would have made bags of money if not for that nasty combination of shortsighted environmentalistm and politics. The trouble with environmentalists is that they campaign against some piece of technology in it's infancy before it's actually been developed far enough to improve its environmental credentials. It never reached the stage of development that other aircraft have achieved.
                      And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X