![]() |
Quote:
Would it cost NASA millions to take pictures from 22 miles up? Absolutely not, its a bit unfair to compare a picture from 200 miles up to 22 miles up. Its a bit dishonest. Tell you what, find a cheap way to take a picture from 200 miles up and we can compare the two and you can hard knock NASA all you want. |
Welcome to the Cellar, bbfrreak. :D
According to the Times... Quote:
I do agree, however, NASA would spend millions to get those shots, because they would want exactly those shots, not random pictures from 22 miles up. They have plenty of similar pictures. They would also incorporate taking the pictures into a program to do a bunch of other shit at the same time, plus spend a million on documentation and reports. Way back in 1964, I worked for a Dr Howell at Tuft's University, where we: 1~ built a package containing a modified Nikon camera, a 24" gold plated beryllium mirror telescope, silver cell batteries, and some electronics. 2~ Flew the package from a balloon, down at Alamogordo, NM, where it climbed 20plus miles and took infrared pictures of the Moon and Venus, for a month. 3~ Remotely cut the balloon free, parachuted the package back to Earth, and retrieved the package with the film. That package made 13 flights, all for less than half a million (1964) dollars. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Tell YOU what..... I can hard knock NASA all I want without finding a cheap way to take pictures from 200 miles up and comparing the two. And welcome to the Cellar.:cool: |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:54 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.