You clearly know nothing on the subject showing, yet again, your total ignorance on the matter
The Space pen was NOT developed at great expense to the tax payer.
It was developed by Fisher privately, NOT under a contract from NASA
"NASA never asked Paul C. Fisher to produce a pen. When the astronauts began to fly, like the Russians, they used pencils, but the leads sometimes broke and became a hazard by floating in the [capsule's] atmosphere where there was no gravity. They could float into an eye or nose or cause a short in an electrical device. In addition, both the lead and the wood of the pencil could burn rapidly in the pure oxygen atmosphere. Paul Fisher realized the astronauts needed a safer and more dependable writing instrument, so in July 1965 he developed the pressurized ball pen, with its ink enclosed in a sealed, pressurized ink cartridge. Fisher sent the first samples to Dr. Robert Gilruth, Director of the Houston Space Center. The pens were all metal except for the ink, which had a flash point above 200°C. The sample Space Pens were thoroughly tested by NASA. They passed all the tests and have been used ever since on all manned space flights, American and Russian. All research and developement costs were paid by Paul Fisher. No development costs have ever been charged to the government.....
...Fisher spent over one million dollars in trying to perfect the ball point pen before he made his first successful pressurized pens in 1965. Samples were immediately sent to Dr. Robert Gilruth, Manager of the Houston Space Center, where they were thoroughly tested and approved for use in Space in September 1965. In December 1967 he sold 400 Fisher Space Pens to NASA for $2.95 each. "
Get your facts straight, troll.
Space/Science » in reply to Such arrogance was profitable, before competitive prizes appeared at NASA.
re: Such arrogance was profitable, before competitive prizes appeared at NASA.
The whole thread (41 posts)
- Some interesting Rover pics (embedded in post)
- Would color photos really have been that much more resource-consuming?
- here's one from last week
- Thanks. I wonder why NASA doesn't transmit more though.
- re: Thanks. I wonder why NASA doesn't transmit more though.
- Once MRO is in place, data tranmission from Mars should be greatly increased. (n/t)
- Pathfinder cost many times LESS & used much older technology.
- re: Pathfinder cost many times LESS & used much older technology.
- re:stupidest conspiracy theory ever
- You don't think LockMart and JPL fear competitive prizes' implications?
- re: You don't think LockMart and JPL fear competitive prizes' implications
- MSL pix: And video! (n/t)
- 2004 cellphones offer it for a fraction of the cost. Why no Mars prizes yet?
- When we have buried mars in telecom sats and microwave towers and copper and silicon cables...
- Last time I tried, my cell phone didn't work on mars
- Won't the 2009 mission already have its relaying network intact?
- re: Won't the 2009 mission already have its relaying network intact?
- Prizes permit economies of scale; and litigation-aversive R&D isn't needed (unlike w/ cars)
- re: Won't the 2009 mission already have its relaying network intact?
- re: Won't the 2009 mission already have its relaying network intact?
- Won't the 2009 mission already have its relaying network intact?
- 2004 cellphones offer it for a fraction of the cost. Why no Mars prizes yet?
- MSL pix: And video! (n/t)
- re: You don't think LockMart and JPL fear competitive prizes' implications
- You don't think LockMart and JPL fear competitive prizes' implications?
- I know what you mean
- re: Thanks. I wonder why NASA doesn't transmit more though.
- Thanks. I wonder why NASA doesn't transmit more though.
- here's one from last week
- Would color photos really have been that much more resource-consuming?
