Sights are off the moon, and maybe put away for good.

  • Topic: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter MotoH
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Moon
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
Sign up Log in
150 replies · 20K views
mheslep said:
You assume the current design is perfected for all LEO needs. It's not.

So we are going to spend 500 million more of what we don't have on something that is already doing a good job?

If it is used for landing on firma petra, then I am all for it. But if it is just another money spender for new space suits then it is crock.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
MotoH said:
So we are going to spend 500 million more of what we don't have on something that is already doing a good job? ...
Almost a good question. How do you know its doing a 'good job'? Maybe there are many serious limitations to what can be done in space right now with the current suit. Maybe the crew could work much faster and accomplish much more with a new suit, that would more than justify the improvements. Why not google a bit and find out?

If on the other hand, your agenda is that you don't care about any space missions aside from manned planetary missions then skip the rationalizations.
 
What is wrong with this one?
34.jpg
 
MotoH said:
What is wrong with this one?

i believe it is what the article says: flexibility. pressurizing the suit is like inflating a balloon, which is much harder to bend when inflated than when deflated. i assume they'd put rigid swiveling joints at key places (elbow, shoulder, knee, hip?, thumb?).
 
Proton Soup said:
i believe it is what the article says: flexibility. pressurizing the suit is like inflating a balloon, which is much harder to bend when inflated than when deflated. i assume they'd put rigid swiveling joints at key places (elbow, shoulder, knee, hip?, thumb?).

That is the Mercury space suit, not meant for OVA's.:-p They had concepts for suits on the science channel a long while ago, and they basically had a lot more swivels, and something else. Meh my memory is mercury.
 
Scientist eyes 39-day voyage to Mars

Franklin Chang-Diaz, a former astronaut and a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), says

...His rocket would use electricity to transform a fuel -- likely hydrogen, helium or deuterium -- into plasma gas that is heated to 19.8 million degrees Fahrenheit (11 million degrees Celsius). The plasma gas is then channeled into tailpipes using magnetic fields to propel the spacecraft .

That would send a shuttle hurtling toward the moon or Mars at ever faster speeds up to an estimated 35 miles (55 kilometers) per second until the engines are reversed.

Chang-Diaz, a veteran of seven space missions, said this rapid acceleration could allow for trips of just 39 days instead of the current anticipated round trip voyage to Mars that would last three years, including a forced stay of 18 months on the Red Planet, as astronauts await an opening to return to Earth...
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20100226/tsc-scientist-eyes-39-day-voyage-to-mars-e123fef.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
YES! I'm so glad this nation is going to spend less money on stupid space exploration! Exploring space is stupid, there are too many problems here on earth. Its like, what are we going to find out there that is so important?
 
MotoH said:
That is the Mercury space suit, not meant for OVA's.:-p They had concepts for suits on the science channel a long while ago, and they basically had a lot more swivels, and something else. Meh my memory is mercury.

Actually, that looks like Neil Armstrong in a Gemini space suit.

Space suits are good. They come in handy sometimes. Soyuz 11.
 
JerryClower said:
YES! I'm so glad this nation is going to spend less money on stupid space exploration! Exploring space is stupid, there are too many problems here on earth. Its like, what are we going to find out there that is so important?

We should, like, spend it on English classes. This kind of comment belongs on the bottom of a Youtube video...
 
We could find large amounts of a resource that's rare here...
 
Char. Limit said:
We could find large amounts of a resource that's rare here...

Unobtanium perchance? :-p
 
MotoH said:
Unobtanium perchance? :-p

:smile:

Why would it be a good thing if we found a resource in space that was rare on Earth?

It'd probably still cost more to go and mine it from the location in space than it would be to search for it and dig it up.
 
Are meteors farmed from the asteroid belt worth just as much as ones that have impacted earth?
 
"An average half-kilometer S-type asteroid is worth more than $20 trillion"
http://www.googlelunarxprize.org/lunar/featured-article/space-the-final-frontier-of-profit

- of course shipping and handling is a bit steep.
 
I'll help, Moto, but I'm broke. You'll have to buy the liquid oxygen and hydrogen.
 
MotoH said:
Is anyone willing to help me build a rocket?

Count me in... rofl. It can't be THAT hard to make a rocket to go to the Asteroid belt and capture a asteroid and bring it back home safely.

1/2km might be a small distance but that's a huge freaking piece of rock to capture lol.
 
as long as we bring enough fuel to put it into a steady orbit around Earth we will be fine!

We need someone who can calculate all of this, so mgb_phys, welcome to Op: BRBABTEFM.

The name of the rocket has already been decided on being called "Executor" after the name of Vaders flagship.
 
A 1/2km sphere of nickel/iron would be about 2million tons
At $50,000/kg for the shuttle to put metal up there, it's worth an extra $100Bn to leave it in orbit.

To the poster complaining about wasting money in space, for the $700Bn admitted hand out to wall st - you could put 15million tons of iron into GTO with a fleet of shuttles or 50M tons using commercial launchers.
Not sure why you would to do this - but it probably makes more sense than giving it to Wall St.
 
Last edited:
Well we can shop around while we are out there. There has to be asteroids with shiny bits on them that people will pay big bucks for!
 
why so much? i thought most of NASAs costs were from labour.
 
Some of the world's greatest inventions have happened when people said "screw cost-benefit, let's do it anyway!"
 
Char. Limit said:
Some of the world's greatest inventions have happened when people said "screw cost-benefit, let's do it anyway!"

Did any of these people see fortunes of their inventions during their lifetimes? :-p
 
Char. Limit said:
Some of the world's greatest inventions have happened when people said "screw cost-benefit, let's do it anyway!"

I'm curious as to what inventions in particular you had in mind.
 
Well... I'm sure someone did... just because I can't think of any doesn't mean there are none...

Seriously, though. Why go for a measly asteroid? I've heard rumors that Jupiter's core is a giant diamond. Go for THAT.

Hmm... guns couldn't have seemed very profitable at first...
 
No, Jupiters core is a colony of Monoliths.

I for one like it to be completely dark at night, and not have a second sun where Jupiter used to be.


2010 references if anyone caught them!
 
Char. Limit said:
Well... I'm sure someone did... just because I can't think of any doesn't mean there are none...

Seriously, though. Why go for a measly asteroid? I've heard rumors that Jupiter's core is a giant diamond. Go for THAT.

Hmm... guns couldn't have seemed very profitable at first...

Let's not talk, for the sake of talking.
 
mgb_phys said:
A 1/2km sphere of nickel/iron would be about 2million tons
At $50,000/kg for the shuttle to put metal up there, it's worth an extra $100Bn to leave it in orbit.

To the poster complaining about wasting money in space, for the $700Bn admitted hand out to wall st - you could put 15million tons of iron into GTO with a fleet of shuttles or 50M tons using commercial launchers.
Not sure why you would to do this - but it probably makes more sense than giving it to Wall St.

Everything he said. +1

The total NASA budget 1958 to 2008 was only $416 billion, currently less than $20 billion per annum. It is nothing next to the wasteful spending habits of our Congress.

The question is who will survive longer: Earth or Homo Sapiens. Our days on Earth are numbered, of course we have no clue as to what the number is. 10 years, 100 years, a billion years?? Someday our descendants must leave or perish. I feel a greater moral obligation to pursue this goal than some new government giveaway to buy special interest votes or campaign contributions.

The ancient Romans used to buy votes but they had the decency to do it with their own money. Our elected officials continue the custom but do it with other peoples money. To cut the miniscule space budget for the sake of political grandstanding is shameful.

Welcome to the third world.