Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SirAaronIII]

The La2t Frontiier
Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Anyway, I think a moon colony before a Mars colony would be a wise move, but who would it belong to/who would finance it? The whole world? We'd have to stop killing each other to get the most out of it, and that's probably not going to happen.

[Gamerlord]

I'm hoping humanity gets to Mars before I die...  But colonising the bottom of the ocean would be an acceptable substitute. Or deep underground. Those places are just as unknown as Mars.

In any case, I don't think humanity is going to get past the moon until we start working together as a planet. So.... never.

[Flying Dice]

Gotta make sure that the supercomputer that will help run the lunar colony won't develop into a self-aware A.I. and help lunar rebels throw off the yoke of oppression. 

[MetalSlimeHunt]

We didn't need to work together for space progress in the Cold War. Just the opposite, in fact, the competition drove space progress then.

The problem is funding and short sighted politicians. NASA has given some of, if not the greatest results of any government agency, and yet it ends up on the chopping block and not, say, the Department of Defense (horribly bloated, by the way). They're politicians. They got where they have by winning popularity contests, not by being smart, so I'm unsurprised that so few of them are able to see the blatantly obvious value of a strong space program now that the United State's doesn't have any other nations' to freak out about.

That's why I wish China the best of luck with it's space program. The EU, as a conglomerate of electoral democracies whom are mostly official US allies, just isn't threatening enough to put fire under a politician's feet. Japan, India, and Russia aren't really active enough in the field, and while the US has been politically rather cold towards the last two it isn't comparable to the Cold War itself. China, on the other hand, is still being used as a stick and carrot by politicians despite how unsustainable Chinese politics actually are. So that's why "Chinese Space Supremacy" is one buzzword I wouldn't be complaining about being used in politics.

[Sowelu]

Gotta make sure that the supercomputer that will help run the lunar colony won't develop into a self-aware A.I. and help lunar rebels throw off the yoke of oppression. 

Mannie?...


Nah, I actually do think that a combination of Heinlein, Ayn Rand and good old fashioned eccentricism will drive at least some of the private colonization efforts.  Which is just fine with me, because I plan to be a Heinleinian rich eccentric gentleman in my old age.

[Lord Shonus]

We need to get a space elevator (or something) going before space exploration/colonization will be economically feasible. Sitting in a gravity well sucks when it comes to getting things away from the gravity well.

Not at all. Even without an efficient plasma thruster, there's quite a few lower-cost-per-spaceflight options. Adapting ALBM technology to replace the lower stage is technologically feasible, as is, in theory, electromagnetic catapult.

[TheBronzePickle]

Unfortunately, with the technology we have, the EM catapult we'd have to design that could safely send living beings into space would have to be pretty damn big. Not to say that we couldn't do it, but I'm not so sure anyone wants to have a gigantic rail/cannon-like object in their backyard, especially when it's going to be propelling objects past the sound barrier and creating a sonic boom every time it's fired.

[Lord Shonus]

You'ld build it on a mountain anyway to get past most of the air resistance, so that would mitigate a lot of the complaint issue. A much bigger problem would be powering it.

[mainiac]

I personally think rockets aren't all that bad.  People just need to realize that it's a step by step process.  It took us 8 years to go to the moon.  If we committed to that kind of timeframe again, we could accomplish a lot.  We also need to simplify, not elaborate.  Look at the Nautilus here.  It is the most capable spacecraft ever proposed (A 24 month timeframe!)  And it's really cheap compared to a less capable craft like the Apollo.  This is possible because it does a lesser range of things.  The Apollo command module not only flew to the moon and docked with the lander module but also made an earth re-entry.  By eliminating the earth re-entry capacity from the Nautilus-X, the possibilities open up a lot.  Do a long mission then fly a second rocket up to get the astronauts home without them having to lug their re-entry craft around with them the entire time.

By calling for an improved launch system, you are basically falling into the same trap that made the space shuttle into a boondoggle.  Don't ask for more because less is more.  Focus on simpler technologies and get the most from your payloads by making vehicles that save on weight by specializing.  The space shuttle could never make it to the moon but Apollo could.  The Apollo could never go on a 24 month journey but Nautilus might do that someday.

[woose1]

Doesn't the moon supposedly have a boatload of Helium-3 that can be used in nuclear fusion in place of tritium? I've heard that at least once on reasons why we should return to the moon.

Pretty much this. A single space-shuttle load of moon-rocks contains enough Helium-3 to power the entire US for a year.

EDIT: It's also much more efficient than tritium, supposedly.

[Il Palazzo]

Doesn't the moon supposedly have a boatload of Helium-3 that can be used in nuclear fusion in place of tritium? I've heard that at least once on reasons why we should return to the moon.

Pretty much this. A single space-shuttle load of moon-rocks contains enough Helium-3 to power the entire US for a year.

EDIT: It's also much more efficient than tritium, supposedly.

The argument of "going to the Moon to harvest fuel for nonexistent powerplants" might not convince many people.

[sneakey pete]

Not to mention that the space shuttle can't go to the moon, land on the moon, or take off from the moon.

[TheBronzePickle]

Obviously, since the Mun is going to be added to Kerbal Space Program in the next update, all NASA needs to do is take the most efficient rocket someone builds from that game that can fly to the Mun and back and copy it.

[sneakey pete]

Indeed, they should start work on a RCS module using landing craft right away

[Fniff]

Someone probably aleady made this joke, but...

SPAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!