- #1
aquitaine
- 30
- 9
I'm sorry but it looks like spaceport america is the real deal
After getting their FAA license and securing funding...
aquitaine said:Because when it comes to people going into space there is a lot of naysaying going on about. I gathered from a previous conversation about the future of manned space travel that many people either don't think it will ever happen, or simply don't want it to.
Personally I think the idea will never make it past the insurance lawyers.
Orbiting the Earth just above 90% of the atmosphere is one thing. Traveling to the moon is another thing altogether. Traveling to the next nearest planet is yet another thing, and going beyond the asteroid belt is still yet another thing.
Having paying customers taking day trips into orbit is only a hair beyond taking an airplane flight, and no guarantee that the "next step" will ever be taken.
This site is chock-full of such. This site is not representative of the taxpayers as a whole. (If it were, Kerry would have beaten Bush by an 85-15 landslide.)Integral said:I am a nay sayer when it comes to NASA and manned missions to the moon or Mars.
D H said:This site is chock-full of such. This site is not representative of the taxpayers as a whole. (If it were, Kerry would have beaten Bush by an 85-15 landslide.)
I am a nay sayer when it comes to NASA and missions that have little if any benefit to humanity (e.g., Kepler). Fortunately for you scientists, Congress does not listen to me. Fortunately for the likes of aquitaine, Congress does not listen to those of you, either.
That human spaceflight has zero value is your religion. It is not a logical point of view.Integral said:ie Manned missions to the moon or Mars.
D H said:That human spaceflight has zero value is your religion. It is not a logical point of view.
D H said:That human spaceflight has zero value is your religion. It is not a logical point of view.
jarednjames said:I agree, space exploration is simply the next step for humans, we explored this planet (albeit not completely yet) and now we are moving on to the next big thing. If we do manage to get manned missions to Mars and an efficient way of gettings things back and forth, the possibilities are endless. Resources for a start.
I do however think they should work on developing the technology a lot further than they have done first and then attempt further space flight.
jarednjames said:whats techno logic (don't say a song)?
If we could mine resources from other planets, it would be of benefit, not much more to say really.
Cyrus said:Did you really think before saying this? (I mean, seriously??) Exactly how are we going to do this, Jared...
We spend billions of dollars to bring back a few moon rock(s). Now you want to excavate? You do realize those minerals will cost more than platinum once they get back to earth.
If I could squeeze my cheeks together and make a diamond, that would be a benefit too, but that doesn't make it anything more than a fantasy or any more useful a statement either.jarednjames said:If we could mine resources from other planets, it would be of benefit, not much more to say really.
jarednjames said:Hence the IF. and as per the previous post, IF we had an efficient (and economical) way to do it, it would be of benefit, but until the technology exists we shouldn't.
Cyrus said:Yeah, but we don't. So don't waste time doing it.
jarednjames said:What? Don't waste time mining (I agree) or don't waste time developing new technology for solar travel (I disagree)?
Cyrus said:"Solar Travel"?
There is a LOT more to say. We have to loft every single gram of fuel, food, equipment, shielding, personnel, etc out of the Earth's gravitational field at a massive cost. Then you have to develop a way to protect the occupants from solar radiation once the craft is out of the Earth's magnetic field. You have to feed and shelter the crew all the way to the planet, build living quarters, mining facilities, and smelters or some other means of concentrating materials, and finally loft the crew and the product out of THAT planet's gravitational field and propel them back to Earth for recovery. Remember that all the fuel that will be required to bring the crew back must be transported to the other planet in the first place.jarednjames said:If we could mine resources from other planets, it would be of benefit, not much more to say really.
FredGarvin said:Personally I think the idea will never make it past the insurance lawyers.
After getting their FAA license and securing funding, the 27 square mile development project has officially begun.
We were extremely fortunate that there were no Solar storms while the Apollo crews were outside the Earth's magnetic field, or the crews would have died of radiation damage.jarednjames said:Exactly how dangerous is the radiation in space? The moon hoax gang use it as a reason they couldn't land on the moon, but I've never seen a definitive answer. Just a load of debates as to whether or not it is dangerous.
Ophiolite said:Why do some of you think we have to lift all the fuel into orbit? Oh, that's right. You are basing it on precedent. The Pilgrim Father's took their firewood with them to the New World and sent back for regular supplies of coal.
The arguments against are just filled with thinking that assumes current technology extends indefinitely into the future with no change. And twenty years ago you hadn't even heard of the internet.
Ophiolite said:I am surprised at the antiquated (and sadly, unscientific) thinking being expressed by several members in this thread. These members appear not to have heard of the concept of economic growth. The present hiccup in the globale economy will hardly put a permanent halt on this.
When I lived in Singapore in the early 1970s a return airfare to the UK cost around 400 pounds sterling. That was about five months salary for a junior teacher. Today I can still get a flight for around four hundred pounds, but that represents only about one weeks salary for a junior teacher. Technology and more efficient application of technology reduces costs.
Mining from planets might be a little foolish - at this point. Almost as foolish as the idea that it could be economic to fly lamb in aircraft half way around the world. However mining of asteroids would be another matter.
Why do some of you think we have to lift all the fuel into orbit? Oh, that's right. You are basing it on precedent. The Pilgrim Father's took their firewood with them to the New World and sent back for regular supplies of coal.
The arguments against are just filled with thinking that assumes current technology extends indefinitely into the future with no change. And twenty years ago you hadn't even heard of the internet.
Chi Meson said:Twenty years ago I had a Compuserve account.
It is NOT "scientific thinking" to say "someday science will figure it out." It IS scientific thinking to make conjectures based on all the evidence as we currently understand them. While it is important to understand that there will be breakthroughs ahead, and that there will be something else discovered that we have no idea about now, we can tell what those things will be, and an expectation that we will discover ANYthing that we want is exactly the same as fiction.
We do know, right now, that interplanetary space, even interstellar space, is awash in energy. Lots of radiant energy for one, there's the solar wind, and lots of hydrogen. There are many ideas out there on how we can use that energy.
The hydrogen ramjet idea is over 30 years old, and would be a great source of fuel once a spacecraft is already traveling at high velocity. Solar sails should work fine for acceleration away from the sun, but the craft would need to be very small compared to the sails, and it would be no good for getting back home (you cannot tack against the wind in space).
Science must be skeptical in the face of goals based on unknown speculation. We have to temper our wishes with our reality (as we understand reality to be). Going into orbit around the Earth is OLD news. It has been done for forty years now. Half a century of orbiting the earth. So now a Spaceport "is going to be built" in order to take people into orbit. How much of a step is that?
We are also now thinking and planning (not building yet) a scheme to get one or two people to Mars and back. I am certain that we will get there, and probably within my lifetime. But large groups of people going to Mars? Not so very soon.
Spaceport America is a commercial spaceport located in New Mexico, USA. It is a launch and landing site for private space companies, and is also used for research and development of space technologies.
Spaceport America is the first purpose-built commercial spaceport in the world. It was designed specifically for commercial space activities and has state-of-the-art facilities and infrastructure.
Spaceport America provides a dedicated and secure location for commercial space companies to test and launch their vehicles. It also offers a variety of support services and resources, such as training and research facilities, to help companies develop their technologies.
Many skeptics believed that Spaceport America would not be successful and would not attract any commercial space companies. However, since its opening in 2011, it has hosted numerous successful launches and has become a hub for private space activities.
Spaceport America is continuously expanding and improving its facilities to accommodate more space companies and activities. It also has plans to develop a Spaceport Village, which will offer a variety of tourism and educational opportunities related to space exploration.