New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: As a reader of NewMars forum, we have opportunities for you to assist with technical discussions in several initiatives underway. NewMars needs volunteers with appropriate education, skills, talent, motivation and generosity of spirit as a highly valued member. Write to newmarsmember * gmail.com to tell us about your ability's to help contribute to NewMars and become a registered member.

#1 Re: Human missions » solar power towers on mars - km-high vertical wind tunnel turbo-elec » 2004-12-02 21:45:21

Forum Administrator, GCNRevenger and other members

Because of your continuing personal insults regarding myself, I have decided to leave this forum. I was here to look over the possible inclusion of the mars society, members and forum participants into our overall strategy to bring like minded individuals into space with us.

I will inform my board that, we will not include any of the people associated with Mars Society and New Mars Forum. As Major Shareholder and CEO of this POCs I will explain my  decision and make it know for my reasons within our alliance of POCs that we are creating.

I Hope the next time you consider that the person you insult, and continue to insult may turn out to be the person that could help you or block you. Today, you haven't made anyone that would help you, in your quest for space.

Have a great time being cynical, insulting and nasty to those who are working for the day humanity gets into space, and If my POCs alliance does it, look for another way into space  because you won't be with us.

Bye !!!!

#2 Re: Human missions » solar power towers on mars - km-high vertical wind tunnel turbo-elec » 2004-12-02 03:00:12

GCNRevenger,

That is an issue also the gravity is less, than earth, yes the air is thinner but the force is still the same, means changes in design and modelling to test wind generation. We can simulate the atomspher density, and velocity of winds over the martian surface the right process could provide the continous energy source required for the outpost. 

If you have proof that the idea wouldn't work because of experiments then provide the research documentation, web address or place to get it, because the initial discussions from wind generation companies are promising for creation of alternative energy sources on Mars.

If , you don't have evidence of tested experiments in Martian Wind Gerneration.  Then, you don't want to even try a new thought / idea because that would be something you need to use your brain with a postive way for , instead of this cynical remarks.

#3 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-12-02 02:42:53

ftlwright,

I always research my facts, and you don't know what I do, and at the end of the day , I know what I am doing and I will let history judge my actions against your actions.

Now, Lets get back to the topic at hand !!!!!

#4 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-12-02 01:41:20

GCNRevenger Posted on Dec. 02 2004, 01:52

Comstar, the big reason that I'm mad at you is your persistant habit of talking down to whoever poses valid questions to your crazy schemes. It makes you sound arogant and stupid... the more you do it, the less reason other readers will have to believe otherwise.

Last two years... geographic region... license rights for an absurd sum... what on Earth are you talking about? Your just babbling to make yourself sound like some kind of enlightend beyond-our-plain business genius unless you have one heck of an explanation.

GCNRevenger , Answer - G3 Mobile telephone Licensing rights in european countries, they must recoup the fees charged by the government. Problem for these companies is the newer technology called 802.11a/b/g wireless LAN systems are more preferred throughout the world because of higher bandwidth for communication and video links another clashing of  technologies like the Beta Max and VHS recording issues of 1970-80's.  So don't dismiss technology or ideas or concepts or strategies that might make your ideas obsolete.

#5 Re: Human missions » solar power towers on mars - km-high vertical wind tunnel turbo-elec » 2004-12-01 23:33:20

Dicktice,

You are trying to come up with new ways to look at issues, what about wind power and different wind towers instead of solar, because of the atomsphere, distance and as we terra-form the planet it will increase the atomsphere interference with sunlight pentration.

But I do agree that solar power in mars orbit focused and concentrated would provide the power requirements until fusion power has been completed in the development, trial and quality testing phases and enough knowledge has been acquired to scale down the size of the fusion generators.

Keep bring ideas forward, I like your style

#6 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-12-01 23:14:34

Euler,

I agree that before you build the infrastructure you must plan, assembly a strategy, implement project team and then work towards the first small objective in a larger complex list of steps to meet the complex goals / objectives to get into space using POCs.

I have completed the three steps on the path of building this reality on schedule.

fltwright,

I love a laugh, especially your first statement , I will tell you why that is funny, ln the last two years a single geographic region of this world charge for licensing rights equivalent of US$350 Billion (1/3 of a trillion dollars ) in a new technology to private enterprise.

That would mean the consumers would need to pay a running cost and license recoup fee and a profit margin for this new technology. The individual enterprises then come together to reduce and eliminate duplication costs thus making the process more economic, so they could sell the technology.

That is why I think your statement is laughable and extremely funny and any person that thinks the same way, not understanding the way business environment will provide a solution to all issues / problems / including government issues.

#7 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-12-01 19:08:42

C M Edwards

I am ok, with GCNRevenger commitments, he is acting out his rage on me, because he doesn't see how POCs can do what I am telling him.

You see GCNRevenger is like those who told the Wright Brothers that you can't flight or that thing won't get off the ground or people like the world is flat in the late 1400's with christopher colombus. If we listened to those people humanity would still be in the stone age or bronze age not past the industrial age into the information age going to the space age of humanity.

GCNRevenger, will be one of the people still on the earth, with rage while the rest of the optimists that understand the current technology level in space can see the way through to expanding humanity into space in a limited way over the next few decades. 

GCNRevenger, At least I know where i am going in my research and development projects for the next few years and the overall strategy has been set. I just see you going round and round in circles from all your commitments on this forum I have read your commitments are always negative towards anyone that tries to move forward by create potential solutions to complex issues.

This issue - What program to push for ? > is viatal for the space program from the US Government and Public Space related development coporations. As what pressure should be maintained on what political processes to ensure that delivery of that program.

GCNRevenger, You should Stop mouthing off like a raging argue person , with no self control, I am sorry , but someone needs to say this CM Edwards.

#8 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-12-01 07:08:16

SpaceNut,

I like your wit , in your answers !!!!

and

Austin Stanley,

Do I need to take you to the bathroom and show you how to do it. Use your brain, it is quite easy to work out all the income streams from outer space and also the methodology for creating a privately funded and managed space program other than government or government agencies.

Or

For simplistic answers for you, everyway to manufacture and supply current space program from earth could be supplied from facilities in orbit or on the moon and also you can get other revenues from geographic / location uniqueness factors.

Does that help you more !!!!!!

If I haven't help I could start a class of space business dynamics 101 for you !!!!

#9 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-12-01 03:18:22

We are talking about what program should we push !!!!

Q1. There are many different scenerios for funding space ventures for POCs. I will talk about two methods 1. New Revenue stream and 2. existing revenue stream.

Q1.1) A new product or service that you apply across the whole world, competing with other corporations for the customer base and the income from the income stream. The income stream must be recurring and providing continous income until the customer stops using the product or service.

Q1.2) Using existing products and services from existing business units expand and acquire more customer base thus expand the income base from the products and services.

In both methods you can also work with partners, alliances and other business relationships that could enhance the outcomes for the revenue stream and the use of the revenue against the costs in space development.

Q2.0) One method of Income from space - a rotating space platform providing gravitation workspace would be valuable real estate in orbit for space tourism and also governments through to private research firms in small space stations or orbiting platforms ( like bigalow ). We will be able to assembly that facility in orbit at a reduced cost making an operational profit in the first year. ( I won't tell how, commerical confidential )  I do have many other methods for income from space, you haven't been thinking much.

Q2.0a) Cause and effect - the permanent space platform for a larger volume of persons and different persons and also can provide leasable space for hotels and other activities, thus opens and expands tourism into space lowers the cost per kilo for cargo and persons to space thus reduces overall costs .

Q3.0) Spineless Public Corporations would go into the space environment unless they see an immediate return on investment that is why they are NASA trained companies.

Q4.0) Well, you don't public corporations have your super and that is high risk with high rewards. And that is the place big boys and girls play , not frighten public corporations should be in. Rockfeller, Morgan, Getty and more are private corporations that eventually became public but when they were private they controlled them by a small number of individuals and space will be the same expect on a planetary scale not a country scale.

The problem with you Austin Stanley is that the issue is can i be one of the few ( in hundreds or thousands not 10 ) or just be a worker paid to come out there by the employer, the POCs to work for them.

This gets back to what we are talking about the program and what to push -----> If you want the program with NASA as leader dog, then make work hard and come up with the new innovations and work for a contract with them.  If you want to have POCs do then support the effects of SpaceshipOne and other developer and develop strategies to bring the various smaller current POCs together and form an alliance to expand space.

#10 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-12-01 02:43:11

Also, Austin Stanley

All the corporation you listed are public accountable corporations,  that must provide information of what they are doing to the public media sources to relate this to shareholders and investor marketplace. I am talking about PRIVATE Unlisted corporations that don't need to prove what they are doing to anyone expect the owners of these corporations.

POCs are PRIVATE and don't require to disclose the business strategies or assets or income or even what they are doing within there corporations under the law.

#11 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-12-01 01:10:04

GNRevenger, and Austin Stanley

I want to give you a lesson is business dynamic of space economics, Privately Owned Corporations (POCs) can use the earth income streams to build space asset base including all the necessary infrastructure for expansion into space for individual or group POCs. Then forming alliances and working with other POCs including specialist POCs could expand the economic framework into a full economy outside the dependence on earth based income streams.

The people ( individuals or groups ) that develop and harness the technologies for space will own the rights to that technology that would be with trillions of dollars and the development of newer technologies, and processes will continue to add value to those POCs. The resources on mars, moon, asteroids and other planetary bodies in our solar system are far greater than the resources of earth.

Currently all technologies including computer technologies that formed the backbone of the IT and communication evolution on earth have all their roots back to space that is trillions of dollars in space income not received. That would change when POCs get into space.

You look at space and business in a simply terms that are not related to business in the 21st century and beyond. Different cultures bring different practices into the business mix and when you understand that you will see that POCs have a greater chance to change the world outside earth then individiual governments.

#12 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-11-30 23:15:08

GCNRevenger,

You think that because a corporation is bound by profit motive it couldn't make the decision to go to moon and take the larger step of going to mars !!!!. Every body on this planet require income and spend their income to meet the needs of their owners ( including citizens within a country ), it just depends on the volume of income inflow and expenses outflow will determine the POCs in space development.

Well, you're ideas and cocepts of POCs and the owners of POCs are flawed. Because for those owners of POCs wanting to go into space are creative thinking individuals that see the next wave of profit potential coming from new and different industries created out of the technology and innovation from the space environment.

This same individuals are not governed by the same rules that the rest of the world work under, because they are the one group that create and build and / or maintain products and services that we all want. Most people have a limited to their thoughts on what can be done, these people work around the issues over the issues and come up with solutions.

Also you are not in the same league as the pioneer developer Burt Rutan, he is one of those individuals that see the issues and creates solutions,( yes, the spaceshipone v1.0 was cheap but did the job, so was the wright brothers' airplane did private enterprise stop there, NO )  you have a mind wall because you think and say - " I can't see private corporations doing that, because you don't want too", that doesn't fit in your nice little world, because that means a different playing board in space development, research, technologies, advancements and exploration can go in a unpredictable way that is innovation and change.

#13 Re: Human missions » What Kind of Manned  Program Should We Push For? - A Time to choose » 2004-11-30 21:47:45

What Kind of mission ? good question

Apollo style  crew - flag and footprints / pathfinder type

or

starter style crew - establish the ground setup for a larger crewed mission ( assembly of food processing and water collection and living environments limited exploration )

or

a combined style crew - a six-eight person crew for assembly of outpost infrastructure and exploration missions that would entail aerial survillenance up to 150 miles diameter. 

Another Question - Does the Government has the willingness to fund this program in the Long Term because of the economic and security environment of today ?

Another Question - Would the Scientific Community push for funding of human crewed missions to Moon and Mars even against the funding of robotic / probe missions because of limited funding ?

Two major questions to start with, for what program we should have and the willingness to fund the proposed push into space and the push even to the moon has major complications and reduced funding and blocks in the government and this would be funding across many years into decades and across different political parties in all governments around the world.

And you think the technological issues are the biggest issues , they are solvable , but some of the political, cultural and economic issues for each government and the earth in general have about space pioneering are large and complex and will need leadership.

Sorry to say - BUT PRIVATELY OWNED ENTERPRISE ( not public corporations ) have a better ability to get things done and not controlled by the public or politiical parties that can make a change in decision that could effect the space advances stall or disappear. For all the people that don't think its possible for PRIVATELY OWNED CORPORATIONS (POCs) have the resources to expand into space look at SpaceShipOne, and that is not public and they are aiming for the earth orbit and the moon, and they are not the only POC doing it.

#14 Re: Human missions » Mars One Way Vs. ISS » 2004-11-30 18:43:03

Grypd, and Bwhite

I don't think you got what i am trying to say, design the program to mars on the assumption that we don't get funding unless we do things that will help the political leadership that is funding the program.

But also build in safeguards that would make it impractical to stop the strategy as it rolls out of the number of years alotted. So the first trip for humans to mars are based a team of 6-8 then some can stay and some can go back when the next vessel turn up with the next crew.

Then the exploration program is then rolled out across the planet on a week, month and year basis, thus keeping in the public eye of the advancements.

I don't disagree with the small operations but nothing less then a team of six per launch with a crewed vessel, and two automated cargo transports per mission and also a cargo transport per three month separately supplying more exploration and droids for expansion and other processing equipment. The automated vessels are moving cargo in a continuous loop between earth and mars or moon and mars.

#15 Re: Human missions » Mars One Way Vs. ISS » 2004-11-29 21:41:08

John and BWhite,

I am not talking about a large scale mobilization, but an integrated strategy that over a period of years and into decades the expansion of mars and the raw material exploration of mars will be conducted and then accessed to bring from small outpost - larger outpost - small permanent base - large permanent base to full colonization settlement of Mars.

But , knowing the way governments work on this planet they don't stay the course when coming to space exploration. Using the " Apollo Style programs " give the governments an out clause, It would be harder if the outpost has permanent crew and only through crew rotation would the crew expansion happen and also new supplies and more automated vehicles, development droids and probes for planetary exploring and development.

also will lock the government to fund the outpost like the ISS agreements are signed for the funding of the ISS life. We need to create the same environment for the funding process for the Mars Mission or it will fail to deliver overall objectives.


Bwhite regarding the frogmen approach, in many landing by allied forces then sent in destroyers and exploded a path to te beach and didn't send frogmen for intelligence gathering or disarming explosives.  If we want to move and hold a budgetary funding in any government for space exploration of mars we need to design the program around those issues and expand the ground survillenance over several missions and expansion flights with automated cargo transports from earth and crewed missions to the planet. \

#16 Re: Human missions » Mars One Way Vs. ISS » 2004-11-29 19:25:09

John,

Why only 4 or 6 people to mars , or thinking only 4-10 people in orbit on ISS, that doesn't help expand space for the human race. That is the " Apollo style " space program - landing on mars like landing on the moon of the early 70's and ISS crews like Skylab of the 80's.

We need to move on from that style of program to a colonization style programs that require a larger number of personnel in orbit, moon, mars and beyond. We need to develop methods, principles, processes and products that are needed for space expansion - satellite development, food growing and processing, mining minerals, manufacturing facilities, and more.

Once we have a large volume of personnel in a gravity assisted environment in earth orbit we can move off into lunar activities then mars activities with experience.  If you don't expand the personnel in orbit you run the risk and costs for moving personnel from earth into orbit that don't have living experience in space and a sound working knowledge of the space vessels and cargo transports.

So, when you are looking at a simple question which is cheaper to run and maintain , it isn't a easy answer because of the challenges that can face the human race in space and the exploration of mars and beyond without have complex settlements to provide away stations for future human missions within our solar system.

#17 Re: Human missions » Mars One Way Vs. ISS » 2004-11-28 22:13:17

John,

the main difference between the mars base and ISS is that the mars base can over time build resources from raw materials on mars where ISS or any other platform must rely on resources coming to the station / platform.

The initial costs for setup and expansion to substainable level will be large capital funding and asset growth in that aspect. After capital outlays the base would return raw materials can then be used to fund expansion of space activities for humanity. food processing, assembly of space vessels and repair and laot of other avenues of commerce to expand the substainability for mars and the moon.

it comes back to the backing and the overall infrastructure budget and organizational structure managing the expansion into space.

#18 Re: Human missions » Mars One Way Vs. ISS » 2004-11-28 17:56:54

RobS,

Yes you can, if the space vessel structure is build on the principle of modular construction. you can use trusses to handle the cargo hauling areas reducing the mass of the sapcecraft. Modular Design allows different modules eg. Navigation systems, Communication Systems, Propulsion Systems and Cargo Systems to be tested without having to create different vessels.

The missions are also determined on the modules used. The Commercial Corporations could use the space vessel to test the various modules and the interactions with other different modules, also the vessel could also provide valuable space experimentations for the human centric missions outside the earth-lunar corridor.

So, the answers simply is YES, RobS you can design and build a vessel for all seasons but depends on the mission involved.
The next place is to have assembly point in orbit for the transformation of the cargo vessel.

We need the research and testing platform for the long term development of space and humanity in space. This would cut the overall costs of a mission or program for future human missions within our solar system and beyond.

#19 Re: Human missions » Mars One Way Vs. ISS » 2004-11-28 00:06:34

I think we are looking at the short term approaches to space travel. We need to create automated transport vessels to launch from earth or lunar orbit then travel to mars and return while dropping off communication and survey vehicles and droids to the outer planets, asteroids , comets and other bodies within our solar system.

It would also be a larger platform for scientific experiments while its cargo tranpsortation duties are being handled as well. We need our interplanetary vessels to do more than just one activity even remote vessels as well. This also brings the risk to humans down and reduces the use of complex living environments onboard these vessels when not required.

This would keep the scientific community happy becuase the human-centric missions as still be conducted in earth-lunar orbits while the scientific activities are conducted via remote / automated vessels,  that also provide testing for larger experiment modules / new propulsion / navigation / communication and control systems for future human missions to mars and beyond.

Both parts of the space program get what they want and at the same time the reliable space cargo platform is tested and used when humans move to mars to establish and maintain a mars outpost then settlement.

#20 Re: Human missions » Why Must Launch Vehicle Development Cost So Much? » 2004-11-27 07:00:31

Dayton 3,

The cost of development shouldn't be anymore than cost for aircraft development / prototyping  or car development / prototyping. Today we can design and simulate all the conditions required for the design before wind tunnel testing and eventual full scale construction.

Once a design has been taking to prototype construction stage - all the costs for tooling, and casting are taken at that time any future sales of that model would start recouping the development costs and also current production costs and a profit margin. Still shouldn't cost alot more then large commercial aircraft costs.

Somewhere , alot of money has been and continues to be wasted for political or finance gains. Not for the benefit for the space program as a whole.

#21 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here. » 2004-11-22 21:47:45

The Main reasons for going to earth orbit, the moon, and beyond.

1. Population - yes, human population will grow and need newer places to expand into and grow in knowledge, have new experiences that can be brought to the human race.

2. Energy - yes the western countries expand our technology use. The only way to fix issues on earth is to develop newer environmental technologies such as fusion generation, solar generation, tranportation drive systems that don't require solid or carbon based fuels.

3. Other Resources - new to expand our race into space we need iron, titanium, copper, nickel, other minerals the planets are similar makeup to earth , but we might find newer minerals and other resources unable to be found on earth.

4. Exploration - To see and gain information, explore ideas , experiment with new concepts and explore the fundamental boundaries of our own knowledge.

We as a race need to move into space, We have a fundamental urge to explore, gain knowledge, to colonize space and nothing will stand in the way for our race to do that.

The first major step is the moon, we need the resources and advantages the moon offers for our future space development and colonization of our solar system and beyond.

#22 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here. » 2004-11-22 06:01:46

Rxke,

Seriously, I understand where you are coming from, a person that comes on a Bulletin Board and says they have a plan to do what everyone wants to do in the timeframe they all want !!!

I haven't given detail because, I want more than providing the information to the forum to mean something. I am working on the implementation, that is the harder reality of the mission to create this powerhouse. To implement the stepping stone corporations that will mask the creation of the space operations poerhouse without bringing the eyes of governments and other industrialists.

I have been looking for small engineering, robotic and other associated industries that are required for long term development, my acquisition list is large but hidden within a list of unrelated corporates from onshore and offshore.

Then divert small amounts for resources (under the existing comporate names) from all these companies into the space operations corporate - all transactions off books as drawings and moved to establish the core infrastructure for the space operations corporate. ( learn from the best to hide activities -US Government )

We are developing new technology and processes that haven't been tried before for space expansion. We need to because of the larger objects that we need to move in space.

Rxke,

Again, I understand that you don't understand what I am doing because I have provided only limited detail information and overview of our thoughts behind the implementation and no facts on what we are doing and the complexities, the risks, the personnel / workforce and more so where the seed capital is coming from to build the infrastructure for the space assets to be created from.

When we are advanced enough that not group can catch up to our development then, we can explain in some detail to the Mars Society for about of implementation strategy, income stream and facilities.

#23 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here. » 2004-11-21 18:06:48

Rxke,

What music would you like to dance too ?

I know you can't see it and how to get there, that is your wall !!!! Do see the use for a large scale operation or where the funds and resources coming from and why ? . The same issues with GCNRevenger, he can't see , he has the same wall issue , you can see only so far.

When John F. Kennedy made a decision to go to the moon the first time and do it by the end of the 60's, we didn't have the technological advancements, we didn't understand the issues, we didn' t have any experience as a race leaving earth. NOW, WE DO, today we have the experience, technological advancement and the drive to meet these challenges head on.

We need a new bold statement, and this is it - " By 2030 humanity will be living permanently in space in earth orbit, on the moon, on mars and beyond with hundreds of personnel expanding the frontiers of humanity. " 

That above statement can apply with government or private enterprise or both ( just for you Martian Republic ) because the world needs humanity to expand out into space, our race requires us to expand into space.

This statement requires a large scale mobilization into space and we don't have the resources to do it here, the moon is the calayst for the expansion and the reduction of overall costs in the expansion process.

I know at the end of the day, Rxke, and GCNRevenger you both can't see a solution to the issue of full scale mobilization into space for humanity, because it requires thinking beyond conventional processes and creating new methods , economics of scale unused on earth to date, and we must change our thinking processes, go beyond our current limitations to create space colonies and our race into space.

Because the earth and our sun are like a grain of sand in the Universe, and we need to see it that way in order to understand that the scaling up is still from a size of a grain of sand.

#24 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here. » 2004-11-21 07:39:52

Rxke,

I hope you read the last messages I have posted because that would require 7-12 years to build the large lunar facilities that I had outlined from the income stream that I outlined.

I think you don't understand the resource requirements for moving hundreds to thousands permanently off the earth and the resources required to create a working environment for those people and create this environment to be self-substaainable in the timeframe outlined.

Currently we don't have any person permanently living in space and working in space past 6 months. We are talking about movement of people into space for years and lifetime.

Rxke, I don't think you understand the vast resources are required for the space expansion. At least I have a strategic operational plan that I am implementing that will take time to assembly all the necessary ground support facilities in all parts of the world under the corporate structure. This plan doesn't rely on the space fairing governments or the industrial corporates that fund current space operations globally.

Yes, Rxke, I have said that people here limit their space development potential to small missions and smaller goals. Yes, My objectives are large and permanent, but they will permanently put humans in space and space will have an instellar economy. I know that the law for space isn't there, and the rights of ownership don't exist, So we need to work through this minefield of complex issues and develop policies to meet those issues.

Inclusion Rxke, Do a bit more thought behind your reason for space travel for humanity and not just " lets take a ride to mars" because we need to have the infrastructure to meet the current and future needs for the human race in space.

#25 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here. » 2004-11-20 22:50:00

Grypd,

Yes, We would do all the surveying or purchase the surveys from a country that already completed the mapping. We are not going back to the moon to " build a cabin on the moon" we are going back to build a industrial complex for the expansion of humanity into space. You think to small in the development approach. I provide a five year overview for lunar expansion.

I am not talking about a couple of droids ( robots ) I am talking about one human as team leader controlling a team of droids (8-10 droids) for site preparation for a large scale industrial facilities, mass driver and lunar settlement facilities. Therefore, by the time the three transport we would have approximately 288-360 droids would under virtual control of 36 personnel, assemblying the industrial facilities direct mining, building the mass driver transport, power facilities, lunar settlement and pressurized landing facilities and hanger facilities. Working towards the development of Manufacturing facilities for space modules, satellites and more.

Orbital droids would be controlled from earth stations similar to call centers with groups of 8 persons controlling 80 orbital droids for space assembly each.

Yes, It will cost a large voluime of money 500-1000 $Billion but once completed the lunar settlement can be used in connection with the orbiting stations to expand humans permanently into space.

But running costs can be recouped through leasing space to other corporates and governments wanting facilities for staff to train, survey and mine, and start a engineering services within the settlement to mancufacturing other vehicles for third parties.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB