Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 64
  1. #11
    laney50w's Avatar
    laney50w is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 19,604, Level: 96
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 96
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Ghost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!200+ Posts Achievement!Got three FriendsFirst 1000 Experience Points20+ Friends Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New Yorkistan
    Posts
    3,121
    Points
    19,604
    Level
    96
    Thanks
    106
    Thanked 1,009x 669 Posts

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by OleCuss View Post
    Yeah, not sure there is a very good reason for that kind of lift capacity - and I'm not at all sure they'll achieve it.

    They keep talking about putting people on Mars. I'm not at all sure there is adequate reason for that.

    Agreed....Sure, it's cool to say that we sent humans to Mars...But, you can do a lot with robots, as well...

    Just some of my personal thoughts:

    If humans were to go to Mars (and we probably will eventually) there's a whole bunch of "issues" that NEED to be considered. Issues that I think will be very hard to overcome.

    Problem #1: "Mental Problems"....The idea of sticking 4-5 people in a small tube for 5-9 months (ONE WAY), with no Sun, no spouse, no family members (loved ones), no other human contact except the other 4 people on board with you, no decent food, conflicting ego's, etc etc...there's a whole bunch of stuff that has to be taken into account for that....It sounds small, but, it's a serious problem.

    Problem #2: You're millions of miles from home.....Something goes terribly wrong with your space craft, and....chances are, you ain't coming back. And no chance of a rescue, either.

    Problem #3: Look what Zero G's does to the human body in orbit for just a week or two? Bone density decreases drastically, muscle loss, etc etc...

    All serious problems....

    As much as I'd love to see it, I doubt we'll see a manned flight to Mars in our lifetime. I have little (to no) faith in NASA at this point, or the space program, in general...Unless the private sector takes over.. Sure, their new rocket is huge, but, unless they're actually gonna' do something with it, it's pointless...They stuck an old capsule design on top of a "new" rocket???? What's the point in that? They're literally going backwards! I think it's a joke. I could go on & on...

    Eh....Don't get me started.

    Just my 2c

    Chris
    Chris
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


    Celestron Nexstar 6SE, Baader 6" Solar Filter, Coronado PST Solar Telescope, Minolta SRT-SC, Canon EOS T1i DSLR, Orion Beta-Hydrogen Filter, Orion Expanse EP's, Orion HighLight EP's, TeleVue 24mm Panoptic, Explore Scientific 82'/14mm EP, four Baader Hyperion EP's, 3mm Edge-On Planetary EP, misc filters, 2x shorty barlow, iOptron Planetary CCD imager
    "My Maserati does one-eighty-five.....I lost my license, now I don't drive"

  2. #12
    Modlerbob's Avatar
    Modlerbob is offline Bright Giants
    Points: 3,373, Level: 38
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 127
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    365 Days+ Registered Achievement!50 Posts Achievement!5 Threads Achievement!First 1000 Experience Points200+ Posts Achievement!
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DeBary, Fl.
    Posts
    244
    Points
    3,373
    Level
    38
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 36x 32 Posts

    Default

    Why is going to the moon to build a permanent base there considered going backwards? It was the most sensible goal for immediate manned space missions stated in the last 20 years. With the moon as our permanent orbiting space station we would have the means to go everywhere else in the solar system and without proving technologies on the moon first other trips would be far too risky for the money people to ever fork over the dough.

    It's like Spain deciding that after Columbus made his first voyages to the carribean that they had seen enough and no further exploration was necessary. Somebody will go back to the moon sooner or later and whoever does will control the future.

    Personally this booster looks as if it could do the job if it ever gets off the drawing board
    Bob DeWoody

  3. #13
    Modlerbob's Avatar
    Modlerbob is offline Bright Giants
    Points: 3,373, Level: 38
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 127
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    365 Days+ Registered Achievement!50 Posts Achievement!5 Threads Achievement!First 1000 Experience Points200+ Posts Achievement!
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DeBary, Fl.
    Posts
    244
    Points
    3,373
    Level
    38
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 36x 32 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crazyhair View Post
    Exactly! This is nothing but job security for the good O boy network! They can't move beyond Apollo, but at least Obama is trying to move us ahead and not backwards like bush! But then in steps the good O boy network crying foul and were back to the stone age!
    I think the idea for a mission to an asteroid was Obama's clever plan to kill the USA's manned space program for at least the duration of his term in office. Knowing full well that no means to get there is buildable within the next ten years. In the mean time the American astronaut corps will dry up and blow away. The group of politicians that Obama is tied to has always thought that money spent on sending humans into space would be better used on welfare programs.
    Bob DeWoody

  4. #14
    Devildadeo's Avatar
    Devildadeo is offline SUPER GIANT
    Points: 9,761, Level: 68
    Level completed: 37%, Points required for next Level: 189
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    200+ Posts Achievement!First 1000 Experience Points50 Posts Achievement!5 Threads Achievement!400+ Posts Achievement
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Davenport IA
    Posts
    602
    Points
    9,761
    Level
    68
    Thanks
    270
    Thanked 224x 154 Posts

    Default

    @Chris... problems 1 and 2 are non issues. People do just fine in strategic nuclear submarines

    Problem three can be overcome with simulated gravity via spin of the craft.

    The real problem with going to Mars is payload. People need a lot of "stuff" to survive on a daily basis. As for a reason to go to Mars, why the hell not? Because its expensive? We waste tons of money on meaningless things all the time. I say go to Mars. And figure out how we can stay there. Returning to the Moon is not such a terrible idea either. If we can figure out how to put enough equipment into space to put people on Mars for extended periods. Those innovations make mining the moon that much more feasible. There is a lot of He3 on the Moon that we could be using to to produce power here on earth super cleanly. But you need a fusion reactor to utilize He3. A reactor that doesn't yet exist. But might, if we started spending real federal money on fundemental research again. The kind of money that would be required if we all decided we wanted to put people on Mars. (See how that circle worked? NASA is more valuable than the sum total of its budget)
    Vixen Foresta 7x50, Nikon Action 10x50
    ETX70-AT w/Reflex Finder
    XT8 (Tube Lined) w/9x50 RA illuminated and Rigel Quikfinder on TL Systems EQ Platform
    Explore Scientific 82 degree 30mm, 24mm, 18mm, 11mm
    Shorty
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    / Zhummel 2" Barlow
    Burgess Planetary 8mm and a handful of Plossls and Kellners

  5. #15
    laney50w's Avatar
    laney50w is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 19,604, Level: 96
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 96
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Ghost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!200+ Posts Achievement!Got three FriendsFirst 1000 Experience Points20+ Friends Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New Yorkistan
    Posts
    3,121
    Points
    19,604
    Level
    96
    Thanks
    106
    Thanked 1,009x 669 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modlerbob View Post
    Why is going to the moon to build a permanent base there considered going backwards? It was the most sensible goal for immediate manned space missions stated in the last 20 years. With the moon as our permanent orbiting space station we would have the means to go everywhere else in the solar system and without proving technologies on the moon first other trips would be far too risky for the money people to ever fork over the dough.

    It's like Spain deciding that after Columbus made his first voyages to the carribean that they had seen enough and no further exploration was necessary. Somebody will go back to the moon sooner or later and whoever does will control the future.

    Personally this booster looks as if it could do the job if it ever gets off the drawing board

    No, I probably didn't clarify..... I meant, the "capsule".....when I talked about going backwards. SORRY!
    Chris
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


    Celestron Nexstar 6SE, Baader 6" Solar Filter, Coronado PST Solar Telescope, Minolta SRT-SC, Canon EOS T1i DSLR, Orion Beta-Hydrogen Filter, Orion Expanse EP's, Orion HighLight EP's, TeleVue 24mm Panoptic, Explore Scientific 82'/14mm EP, four Baader Hyperion EP's, 3mm Edge-On Planetary EP, misc filters, 2x shorty barlow, iOptron Planetary CCD imager
    "My Maserati does one-eighty-five.....I lost my license, now I don't drive"

  6. #16
    KathyNS's Avatar
    KathyNS is offline Super Moderator
    Points: 173,046, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 54.0%
    Achievements:
    200+ Posts Achievement!Ghost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!First 1000 Experience Points400+ Posts AchievementGot three Friends
    Awards:
    Reply Award
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    25,172
    Points
    173,046
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    6,660
    Thanked 14,985x 9,542 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by laney50w View Post
    No, I probably didn't clarify..... I meant, the "capsule".....when I talked about going backwards. SORRY!
    I don't agree that a capsule is going backwards. The Challenger crew would be alive today if they had been in a capsule.

    Even with the piggyback configuration of the shuttle (a major safety blunder), if they had made the crew compartment of the shuttle an ejectable module (i.e. a capsule), they could have survived. Electronics can provide the fast reflexes to initiate a launch abort, but the mass of the ejected module must be light enough that an escape system can provide the rapid acceleration needed to escape an explosion. You can't escape in a large vehicle, but you can in a small capsule.

    I think the move back to a capsule is recognition that the shuttle's design was an inherently dangerous configuration that directly contributed to both shuttle accidents. The capsule on top of the stack was adopted early in the space programs of both the US and the USSR because it is the safest configuration. I am glad that they are going back to it.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


    DSO AP:
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    Newtonian Astrograph; ATIK 383L+; EFW2 filter wheel; Astrodon Ha,LRGB filters; KWIQ/QHY5 guide
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    ; Planetary AP: Celestron C-11; ZWO ASI120MC; Portable: Celestron C-8 on
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    pro; C-90 on wedge; 20x80 binos; Etc: Canon 350D; Various EPs, etc. Obs: 8' Exploradome;
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    (pier);
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    .

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

  7. #17
    mplanet62's Avatar
    mplanet62 is offline SUPER GIANT
    Points: 7,498, Level: 60
    Level completed: 74%, Points required for next Level: 52
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Ghost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!200+ Posts Achievement!Visitor Messenger Achievement!Got three FriendsFirst 1000 Experience Points
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    @
    Posts
    1,223
    Points
    7,498
    Level
    60
    Thanks
    638
    Thanked 493x 367 Posts

    Default

    It's hard to me to see any viable purpose for this thing except great show-off. It's proven that robots do just well in space research- because of them we know of Solar System more than ever. Humans are so specifically Earth-bound living beings. All outer space is hostile to them - extremely hostile. Even in space around the Earth astronauts must hide inside the planet's magnetic field. Without it - or a lot of lead around the ship - interplanetary travel is one-way ticket. Except the Moon, and that not for too long. From this point plus food plus air, fuel, etc - Mars ship must look like tank Abrams - just made of lead. With a crew of 2 or 3 men. One can send 80 Mars (or Moon) rovers there instead.
    People have a lot to do on the Earth and in space around it, but unless we change dramatically as living organisms - deep space will be a no-go zone for us.
    What other purpose of the rocket would be? I don't know. Werner von Brauns and Korolyovs of modern times seem to be keeping it to themselves. What's new?

  8. #18
    Crazyhair's Avatar
    Crazyhair is offline White Dwarf
    Points: 790, Level: 15
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 10
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    365 Days+ Registered Achievement!2 Posts Achievement50 Posts Achievement!20 Posts Achievement!5 Threads Achievement!
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Lafayette, Co.
    Posts
    27
    Points
    790
    Level
    15
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modlerbob View Post
    I think the idea for a mission to an asteroid was Obama's clever plan to kill the USA's manned space program for at least the duration of his term in office. Knowing full well that no means to get there is buildable within the next ten years. In the mean time the American astronaut corps will dry up and blow away. The group of politicians that Obama is tied to has always thought that money spent on sending humans into space would be better used on welfare programs.
    Obama isn't trying to kill anything except backward thinking in the space program. The good O boy network I'm talking about are the main companies including NASA that are always getting the money to build rockets. It's like they have entitlement to all the money and with that comes lazy thinking and sloppy engineering. No one thinking outside the box because of the gravy train. The shuttle program and Apollo served it's usefulness and it's time to move on instead of throwing away money on the good O boys who expect the money because they think it's entitled to them! We need private enterprise to take some of the lead on things, and help jump start new ideas. To all the chicken little people who think the sky is falling and the space program is going to dry up, hang up your cell phones and go back to school! Questioning authority is a good thing, to a point! Our government isn't that stupid to let the space program dry up. It makes for a good conspiracy theory for those who have nothing better to think about, but that's about it! Try channeling that energy into new ideas instead of tired old thoughts. We have no idea what programs are in the works both with the government and the private sector. It's getting them past the politics that is the biggest hurdle. I say keep involved no matter what political side you are on, with respect for what is good for all the people. Keep looking up to the sky, and study more than the beauty and wonder of the planets, learn from them. Because one day someone else might be looking at our planet saying to themselves. I wonder if there was ever life on that planet?

  9. #19
    Modlerbob's Avatar
    Modlerbob is offline Bright Giants
    Points: 3,373, Level: 38
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 127
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    365 Days+ Registered Achievement!50 Posts Achievement!5 Threads Achievement!First 1000 Experience Points200+ Posts Achievement!
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DeBary, Fl.
    Posts
    244
    Points
    3,373
    Level
    38
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 36x 32 Posts

    Default

    I guess only time will tell whose is right on this issue. But I've been to school and I have watched the space program grow since day one. I am entitled to my opinion about Obana's motives without being told I don't know what I'm talking about.
    Bob DeWoody

  10. #20
    Voyager3's Avatar
    Voyager3 is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 14,604, Level: 83
    Level completed: 30%, Points required for next Level: 246
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Ghost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!200+ Posts Achievement!400+ Posts AchievementFirst 1000 Experience Points50 Posts Achievement!
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,211
    Points
    14,604
    Level
    83
    Thanks
    1,226
    Thanked 849x 646 Posts

    Default

    3 things:

    1) I agree with everyone who's skeptical this project will ever see the light of day. It's no longer about vision, it's about funding. And the USA's economic future is grim indeed.

    2) Ever since the Orion project was scrapped, and the James Webb space telescope was put on the ropes, NASA has belatedly developped a PR branch. The agency's survival is contingent on influencing the taxpayer with a lot of glitz and glam. I (really) wish them luck.

    3) Both the Orion project and this new space rocket are clones of 45 yr. old Apollo systems. Were Von Braun and Houbolt really that far ahead of their time?
    Or is using off-the-shelf technology just a sign that NASA can no longer afford breakthrough R&D?
    C-800 Edge HD |TV 101| ES ED80 | WO ZS66 SD | Coronado PST | SW 130 Dob | B & L 8080 | ST-80 |
    Nexstar 8SE l EQ-5 l EQ3-2 l EQ-1 l AZ-3 | Vixen Mini-Porta l
    ES 7.6mm & 16mm | Nagler 9mm | Panoptic 24mm | TV 32mm & 40mm Plössl |

    “The history of astronomy is a history of receding horizons.”
    ― Edwin Hubble

 

 
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Great Rocket !
    By marcus videus in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-28-2009, 06:12 AM
  2. Venus and Rocket
    By Starlord in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-24-2005, 06:09 PM
  3. NASA's Marshall Center Successfully Tests Giant 'Bottle Rocket'
    By Double-A in forum General Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-03-2005, 03:36 PM
  4. Rocket?
    By Skywise in forum Satellite Observing Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-29-2004, 08:07 AM
  5. Last of NASA's Great Observatories Launched by 300th Boeing Delta Rocket
    By Ron Baalke in forum General Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-25-2003, 03:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Powered by vBulletin®
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:00 AM.