>>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

gaetanomarano · 2008-01-01 17:34:26

.

EIGHT months ago, I've proposed MY idea of an "underside-LAS":

in my April 5, 2007 article:

http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/020newLAS.html

then, last december, NASA has proposed the "MLAS" as a possible tower-LAS alternative:

get-attachment.asp?action=view&attachmentid=36783

exposed in this article:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5300

AGAIN... OF COURSE... they say that have "invented" it in 2006...

"invented it before", "devloped internally", "already thought", etc. ...it's going to be a classic with my ideas...

however, but there is NOT any PUBLIC evidence of that... NO 2006 news, NO 2006 articles or .pdf on the NASA site, NOTHING

what's really curious and funny, is that LOTS of "experts" have written critics and insults against me in the past months saying "how much" my ideas was unfeasible, not a good engineering choice, bad, heavy, etc. etc. etc.

while NOW that a similar idea (but not good like MY idea) is proposed by NASA, everybody take it seriously, or are silent...

.

JoshNH4H · 2008-01-01 18:00:00

I'd say this one is definitely spam.

gaetanomarano · 2008-01-01 19:03:04

I'd say this one is definitely spam.

everyday I receive lots o emals about viagra, medicins, casino games, porn sites, loans, etc.

THAT is "spam", NOT my articles, threads and posts!!!!!!!!!

calling my articles "spam" is an OFFENSE aginst me since I put lots of work to think, write articles (with twice the effort since english is not my mother language) draw images and publish them!!!

maybe, you don't like them... or the fact that I say I've published my ideas "n" months or years BEFORE the space agencies and space industries... but it's NOT my guilty if they "invent" the SAME things "n" months or years AFTER me... it's ONLY the TRUE reality of FACTS...

.

Terraformer · 2008-01-02 06:05:09

So... since we only 'learn' of these things when you tell us, how can we be sure you aren't copying NASA/Other Space Agency? They could have had it on their site ages ago somewhere where not many people look, you see it and say 'good idea, I'll nick it', post it on your site, then accuse them of nicking your idea.

gaetanomarano · 2008-01-02 07:55:39

So... since we only 'learn' of these things when you tell us, how can we be sure you aren't copying NASA/Other Space Agency? They could have had it on their site ages ago somewhere where not many people look, you see it and say 'good idea, I'll nick it', post it on your site, then accuse them of nicking your idea.

ask NASA & C. about it, or search yourself, you'll find NOTHING

also, it's hard to say that about the ESAS plan, since, that plan, itself, is a long list of possible options about everything, from engines to rockets to capsules, etc. but there is no MLAS in the ESAS...

NASA dont't say they have invented it in 2006, but only that Mr. Griffin has made a draw of an SM side-LAS (something like the Kliper side-LAS) on a napkin in 2006... so, we can evidence that fact with the carbon-14 test of the Griffin's napkin...

.

Terraformer · 2008-01-02 08:23:10

But someone came up with the idea, was it six years ago?

gaetanomarano · 2008-01-05 18:34:22

.

to be democratic, the poll lacks a question: "is the underside-LAS a TRUE technical prediction?"

.

GCNRevenger · 2008-03-22 16:47:47

Gaetanomarono circa >1000BC: Hey, early man, putting the animal in the front of the cart (instead of the side) was my idea!!!

Gaetanomarono circa 1900AD: Hey Wright Brothers, putting a propeller on a flying wing was my idea!!!

Gaetanomarono circa 1930's: Hey Robart Goddard, putting the second stage on TOP of the first was MY IDEA!!!11!1

Gaetano, one of the reasons that nobody respects you is that you take credit for simple or obvious ideas, and loudly insist that you be given praise for it or defend them with intellectually dishonest prattle. Thus, spam.

Given the LAS motors size/weight and the Orion's SM design have to be attached to the capsule either on the top or on the sides. If a flipped coin lands heads up instead of tails, why should we give you any credit?

Even then, your drawing of LAS motors on the bottom of the capsule is not what NASA is considering with the MLAS system, despite what you insist. Further dishonesty.

And last but not least, big advertisements for ghostnasa T-shirts and a banner ad for "VeryEasyEuro" domain name that you are selling for thirty thousand euros. Not merely taking credit for a simple, obvious bit of marketing but actually charging a huge sum of money for it. Spammer.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-22 17:21:21

circa >1000BC: Hey, early man, putting the animal in the front (instead of the side) was my idea!!!
circa 1900AD: Hey Wright Brothers, putting a propeller on a flying wing was my idea!!!
circa 1930's: Hey Robart Goddard, putting the second stage on TOP of the first was MY IDEA!!!11!1

MANY great inventions come from SIMPLE ideas and the FIRST peoples that had these "simple" ideas was their INVENTOR ...clearly, EVERY idea is "simple" and "obvious" when someone else has ALREADY invented it...

...nobody respects you...

sorry, but I post also on several MODERATED blogs that post my comments since they respect me... ...there are only two kind of peoples that don't respect me: the non-NASA but zelaous and blind NASA-fans and the propaganda army of the Direct-lobby

...big advertisements for ghostnasa...

every good website has advetising if its owner wants to do more and start new projects, also, GREAT PART of the space forums, blogs and news sites (NSF, space.com, HobbySpace, etc.) linked on space forums like this have plenty of banners but that seems don't disturb you...

.

cIclops · 2008-03-23 02:39:54

gaetanomarano,

It would be very helpful if you could post all your comments about Ares, Orion and other elements of Constellation here in future. The status topics for Orion, Ares I, Ares V and Altair are intended to keep readers up to date about developments, not for detailed discussion about alternatives. This way discussion can be focused on your suggestions and comments. The topic title now reflects this change.

Thank you.

zhar2 · 2008-03-23 07:20:07

Gaetanomarono circa >1000BC: Hey, early man, putting the animal in the front of the cart (instead of the side) was my idea!!!
Gaetanomarono circa 1900AD: Hey Wright Brothers, putting a propeller on a flying wing was my idea!!!
Gaetanomarono circa 1930's: Hey Robart Goddard, putting the second stage on TOP of the first was MY IDEA!!!11!1
Gaetano, one of the reasons that nobody respects you is that you take credit for simple or obvious ideas, and loudly insist that you be given praise for it or defend them with intellectually dishonest prattle. Thus, spam.
Spammer.

I concur, you cant accuse goggle of plaigerizing your ideas specially if its as said above very simple, also if they were to "recognise" that it was your idea what do you want?, money or just recognition.
And in future i would recomend to protect your ideas or get them across in a safe maner if you think that they "stole" your idea.

And wow your advertising costs are way too high mate.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-23 08:10:50

...money or just recognition...

if it's so "simple" why haven't they proposed two years ago (when I've sent my mail to Google) or (best) months or years before?

.

GCNRevenger · 2008-03-24 09:44:35

...money or just recognition...
if it's so "simple" why haven't they proposed two years ago (when I've sent my mail to Google) or (best) months or years before?.

Oh brother

RedStreak · 2008-03-24 12:01:50

AGAIN... OF COURSE... they say that have "invented" it in 2006...
"invented it before", "devloped internally", "already thought", etc. ...it's going to be a classic with my ideas...

Classic gaeto claiming he invented everything from the wheel onward.

however, but there is NOT any PUBLIC evidence of that... NO 2006 news, NO 2006 articles or .pdf on the NASA site, NOTHING
what's really curious and funny, is that LOTS of "experts" have written critics and insults against me in the past months saying "how much" my ideas was unfeasible, not a good engineering choice, bad, heavy, etc. etc. etc.
while NOW that a similar idea (but not good like MY idea) is proposed by NASA, everybody take it seriously, or are silent...

*blows foghorn of criticism into gaeto's ear*

The silence is broken. The fact there's no public evidence suggests it was not NASA funded and I don't recall any rocket using an escape system like that. You whine about windtunnel testing and vibrations with the current design...

WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK AN AWKWARD SET OF ROCKETS JUTTING OUT WILL DO TO THE AERODYNAMICS?! MAKE IT DANCE LIKE A BALLERINA?!

It has been voted. You...are the weakest link. Goodbye.

RedStreak · 2008-03-24 12:08:27

Gaetanomarono circa >1000BC: Hey, early man, putting the animal in the front of the cart (instead of the side) was my idea!!!
Gaetanomarono circa 1900AD: Hey Wright Brothers, putting a propeller on a flying wing was my idea!!!
Gaetanomarono circa 1930's: Hey Robart Goddard, putting the second stage on TOP of the first was MY IDEA!!!11!1
Gaetano, one of the reasons that nobody respects you is that you take credit for simple or obvious ideas, and loudly insist that you be given praise for it or defend them with intellectually dishonest prattle. Thus, spam.

Amen to all of the above.

I still have yet to see gaetano write an article that doesn't include either a link to his site or a JPEG.

zhar2 · 2008-03-24 12:18:48

Something else, you seem to suggest various ways to "improve" designs but you give no evidence if your suggestions are feasible.

For example, in your "How to design a lighter orion" you talk of cutting bits and repshaping the capsule, but you do not give considerations why its already ike that (those things include aerodinamics, material strenght and weight, and inernal architecture to provide overall intergrity), plus you go around making assumptions on the aerodinamics of re-entry for various capsules, and a complete lack of numbers (including the calculations) and if you do provide numbers you dont provide support for them.

Something else too, your web pages text style feel as if it where screaming right at you, Oh and VeryEasyEuro is a terrible url name ad if i were you i would have droped the very (although the whole name feels like a con-website, i wonder how many people have contacted you about buying it).

GCNRevenger · 2008-03-24 16:14:20

Something else, you seem to suggest various ways to "improve" designs but you give no evidence if your suggestions are feasible.
For example, in your "How to design a lighter orion" you talk of cutting bits and repshaping the capsule, but you do not give considerations why its already ike that (those things include aerodinamics, material strenght and weight, and inernal architecture to provide overall intergrity), plus you go around making assumptions on the aerodinamics of re-entry for various capsules, and a complete lack of numbers (including the calculations) and if you do provide numbers you dont provide support for them.
Something else too, your web pages text style feel as if it where screaming right at you, Oh and VeryEasyEuro is a terrible url name ad if i were you i would have droped the very (although the whole name feels like a con-website, i wonder how many people have contacted you about buying it).

Oh but he does have numbers for how much lighter or how much more payload his designs have, which is very difficult to calculate accurately without NASA-grade professional modeling. But in gaetano land, his numbers are for us to disprove, not for him to validate. Then he starts with "oh but you don't know I'm wrong" nonsense, where he equates his abilities versus an army of aerospace engineers.

Heh, and that nobody has purchased his insanely over-priced domain name kinda answers that last question, doesn't it?

Rxke · 2008-03-25 05:37:48

gaetanomarano,
It would be very helpful if you could post all your comments about Ares, Orion and other elements of Constellation here in future. The status topics for Orion, Ares I, Ares V and Altair are intended to keep readers up to date about developments, not for detailed discussion about alternatives. This way discussion can be focused on your suggestions and comments. The topic title now reflects this change.
Thank you.

Hear, hear. I come to those topic to see what's the news. Not for discussing alternatives. it just don't belong there, the topic are called STATUS, not Discuss :evil:

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-25 07:29:27

...he invented everything from the wheel...

sorry, but, no, I've not invented the wheel... just since I was not born before, of course...

however, "before" or "after" is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of DATE (since january comes before february, 2008 before 2009, etc.)

.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-25 07:31:28

...the topic are called STATUS, not Discuss...

this is not the Ares-1 status thread (however, I hope we can post our opinions also in a "status" thread)

.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-25 07:36:43

...write an article that doesn't include either a link to his site or a JPEG...

my main work is on my sites and I can't close them to write everything on other sites, also, a linked article is PART of the place (or discussion) where the link is posted (THIS is the way internet works) and, post an image, may help the users to know the argument without actually read the article

.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-25 07:42:58

...you seem to suggest various ways to "improve" designs but you give no evidence if your suggestions are feasible...

all my proposals are just concepts since I need a space agancy/company to actually develop and test them (then give exact figures) so, my goal is to see the existing agencies and companies to actually study my ideas (but, without claim that are THEIR ideas, of course)

.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-25 07:46:40

.

maybe you don't like me and my proposals, but I take them seriously, then, I hope Mods will delete soon the stupid poll added to my thread, thanks

.

cIclops · 2008-03-25 08:06:03

.
maybe you don't like me and my proposals, but I take them seriously, then, I hope Mods will delete soon the stupid poll added to my thread, thanks
.

Currently the result of this "stupid poll" has a majority saying your topic is spam, so it's more likely the topic will be deleted than the poll.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-25 10:16:06

Currently the result of this "stupid poll" has a majority saying your topic is spam, so it's more likely the topic will be deleted than the poll.

ALL countries' space programs have born (and still exist) ONLY because their governments have decided to invest giant amounts of public funds on space technology AGAINST the LARGE MAJORITY of their countries' peoples (read: electors and taxpayers) that always want to spend that money for OTHER THINGS like tax-cut, health, instructions, etc.

then, be "the majority" doesn't always means "be right"

.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2008-01-01 17:34:26

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#2 2008-01-01 18:00:00

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#3 2008-01-01 19:03:04

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#4 2008-01-02 06:05:09

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#5 2008-01-02 07:55:39

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#6 2008-01-02 08:23:10

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#7 2008-01-05 18:34:22

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#8 2008-03-22 16:47:47

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#9 2008-03-22 17:21:21

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#10 2008-03-23 02:39:54

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#11 2008-03-23 07:20:07

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#12 2008-03-23 08:10:50

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#13 2008-03-24 09:44:35

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#14 2008-03-24 12:01:50

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#15 2008-03-24 12:08:27

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#16 2008-03-24 12:18:48

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#17 2008-03-24 16:14:20

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#18 2008-03-25 05:37:48

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#19 2008-03-25 07:29:27

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#20 2008-03-25 07:31:28

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#21 2008-03-25 07:36:43

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#22 2008-03-25 07:42:58

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#23 2008-03-25 07:46:40

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#24 2008-03-25 08:06:03

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

#25 2008-03-25 10:16:06

Re: >>> another "developed internally..." idea from NASA >>>

Board footer