Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 113 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#41
ya but whats stopping countries rolling in money? if we dont do thing because the cost scares us we will get no where plus there was a good plan to go to mars for a year that really wouldn't have costed much, it was to send two space craft to mars the first an unmanned space craft with hydrogen fuel for a return trip and then a manned craft to mars
 
Posts: 113 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#42
Originally Posted by festivalnut View Post
well most of the governments would face a revolution if they started pumping 50% of their gdp into space exploration!
such a large investment would probably depend mostly on private investment, and with the short/medium term reward being cerebral rather than monetary, not many of the people or business with the amount of money we're talking here would be willing to invest at the moment.
personally i think all major governments should join forces when it comes to space exploration it would cut the cost down an awful lot if everyone worked together (perfect world ha )
 
YoDude's Avatar
Posts: 2,869 | Thanked: 1,784 times | Joined on Feb 2007 @ Po' Bo'. PA
#43
Originally Posted by Dollyknot View Post
The high cost to the human race's colonisation of space is caused by the complexity and danger of reaching and leaving escape velocity within the earth's atmosphere.

The Space Shuttle turned out to be an expensive and dangerous white elephant, the reason the Shuttle was so expensive is, because of its complexity with millions of different manufactured parts, and the need to cover it with bathroom tiles.

There is another route, we can reach the edge of space no problem Burt Rutan proved this with Space Ship one, when he won the 'X' prize by reaching over 100 km twice in one week.

Yes the Shuttle was 'reusable' but in name only. They could not have turned that around in a week.

What NASA should be doing is creating rocket fuel on the moon, there is lots of water on the moon, use solar energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen, which when combined make very good rocket fuel, because of Newton's third law.

Use the rocket fuel to fuel a space tug, use the space tug to accelerate and decelerate Space Ship one, to and from escape velocity in the safe vacuum of space, no atmosphere = no friction = no heat = no bathroom tiles and no foam shielding on the external fuel tank.

Less bathroom tiles + insulation foam = less rocket fuel = less pollution in the Mexican Gulf.

Once we can accelerate and decelerate space craft with rocket fuel that is obtained from outside of the earth's gravity well, space travel becomes cheaper by many orders of magnitude, ok the capital cost would be very high, but once the systems are in place, the number of human beings, living in space increases exponentially.

A good example for the way very high capital cost projects work, is the Panama canal.

http://dollyknot.com
Um... your argument is based on me spending my tax dollars?

Where is the UK's space program located? Maybe they will use your ideas in their next project.
__________________

SLN member # 009
 
Posts: 113 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#44
ha id love if my tax was going into something constructive for the human race instead of going into some bankers pocket
 
Posts: 92 | Thanked: 13 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ leicester UK
#45
Originally Posted by festivalnut View Post
well most of the governments would face a revolution if they started pumping 50% of their gdp into space exploration!
such a large investment would probably depend mostly on private investment, and with the short/medium term reward being cerebral rather than monetary, not many of the people or business with the amount of money we're talking here would be willing to invest at the moment.
Money don't feed people, work feeds people, money is an insidious form of slavery, performed with the desire to depersonalize the persons wallet you are trying to empty, justified by calling them a 'punter' like 'punters' are somehow not human, so it is okay to rip them off?
 
Posts: 113 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#46
a major worldwide space program for exploring the galaxy would create an untold amount of jobs sigh if only someone like jfk was alive at least he had vision
 
Posts: 889 | Thanked: 537 times | Joined on Mar 2010 @ scotland
#47
Originally Posted by Dollyknot View Post
Money don't feed people, work feeds people, money is an insidious form of slavery, performed with the desire to depersonalize the persons wallet you are trying to empty, justified by calling them a 'punter' like 'punters' are somehow not human, so it is okay to rip them off?
man you're so high i think you're near orbit already! Yup money's the root of all evil, but right now its a fact of life, and if you're ten step plan to colonise the solar system involves ridding the world of money, you're going to run into some problems!

who's ripping who off? who mentioned the word punter before you? what the hell did you put in your pipe before you coined the phrase "depersonalize the persons wallet"?

yes in an ideal world we could all get bye as equals and live on work and merit alone. but will you be the guy mining miles beneath the earths core for the precious metals required for space flight? only to swap them for a meal and a beer? no didn't think so.
__________________
sarcasm may be the lowest form of wit, but its the only wit i have.

its a sad day when i can't slip at least one hitchhiker reference in somewhere.
 
Posts: 92 | Thanked: 13 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ leicester UK
#48
Originally Posted by Icyseanfitz View Post
ya but whats stopping countries rolling in money? if we dont do thing because the cost scares us we will get no where plus there was a good plan to go to mars for a year that really wouldn't have costed much, it was to send two space craft to mars the first an unmanned space craft with hydrogen fuel for a return trip and then a manned craft to mars
First we must make the achievement of human orbital velocity far cheaper and safer than than the shuttle made it.

Using the the provable rocket fuel that is probably on the moon is the way forward.

Apart from the fact that it worked, the Apollo program was remarkably silly if the rocket fuel was already up there, why go to the extraordinary effort of lifting all that delta v up from the ground, when it is up there already?
 
Posts: 113 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#49
could probably make machines that do that for us controlled by my n900
"at festivalnut"

Last edited by Icyseanfitz; 2010-05-15 at 23:58.
 
Posts: 113 | Thanked: 8 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#50
Originally Posted by Dollyknot View Post
First we must make the achievement of human orbital velocity far cheaper and safer than than the shuttle made it.

Using the the provable rocket fuel that is probably on the moon is the way forward.

Apart from the fact that it worked, the Apollo program was remarkably silly if the rocket fuel was already up there, why go to the extraordinary effort of lifting all that delta v up from the ground, when it is up there already?
well tbh they probably didnt know what was up there then and the easiest way to solve the massive cost of leaving earth orbit would be to make all spacecraft in space god i hope i live to see some of this stuff probably not though
 
Reply


 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:09.