You are not logged in.
Would it be worth starting to lay any new modules in parallel to the existing station linking them together at the mid point and continuing to do so as each is added along the full length of the station. In addition bring up more gyro's to handle the additional loading weight of those new modules.
Depending on the close encounter of these near Earth objects what is the distance relationship to Earth that would allow for it to be deflected by gravity either to be directed on a collision course or to be captured. Any references?
Well, since we are able to see a 14 x Earth with a very small telescope maybe we have finally found a way by which to link telescopes to finally actually see them that are much larger.
One can only hope to see another blue marble around an alien sun...
I was not quite sure of which topic to post this under but her goes.
We all know that developement of Nuclear power for space use is a must but in the same vein we know how dangerous it can be as well. Though a slow process of learning and or understanding we can build safer and more robust reactors. We must over come or fears of it for the eventual use of it in space to shorten the length of time to the planets and to give the much needed power resource for use for extended flights.
Analysis: Nuclear Power Gaining Popularity
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/nuclear-civil-04l.html
Speaking of adding more modules to the station, the Russian do plan on just that.
Russia to add new module to ISS in 2007
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.htm … &PageNum=0
A lot of the designs have been tested within many of the universities and research labs but they have not been massed produced for real applied use.
I just do not get how we can keep awarding contracts this way. The money paid must be for pre paid storage of the 4 delta's.
Boeing wins rocket contract despite suspension
http://www.centredaily.com/mld....249.htm
Bureaucracy Pins Rocket to Earth, Da Vinci a privately developed spacecraft, still doesn't have a couple of precious pieces of paper it needs to get to space. I guess they feel that the rocket has not been though enough testing to ensure safety of crew and of flight area.
Structural engineering would probably run an I-beam or truss the length of the modules and to tie each module to it to give it a more ridget support system rather than putting stress on the node inter connection points. But how would one get a continuous piece up to the station since no vehicle could bring up one of the appropiate length. All the more reason to do more than science at the station.
The problem with any colonization is trade routes must be established. That in itself would aid private and commercial business to finally join in because they can see a profit is to be made.
A launching pad from a moon base colony is only one thing that it could or should be doing the other is useful mineral export trade from Earth to the moon as well as from the moon the Mars. In addition Mars should and probably be doing the same thing with exporting similar minerals to the moon as well as to Earth if one only takes the time to look.
But for china's people to want to buy American goods they need to be equal to or of lower cost than there own produced products.
Why waist the time with sending any probes at all?
We do not need science to build, only mining or bull dozer equipment. We know where we want to be for the chance of water contained regolith at the poles in deep creaters. Pick one it has two of them to chose from.
What will be of need for telerobotics is networking of satelites to allow for constant communications.
Once the cave or mining hole is dug. Then what next? Man... and more.
Lets go....
The battery company that I believe made them for Hubble.
http://www.srbatteries.com/aviation.htm
SR Batteries can supply you with custom made nickel cadmium battery packs and charging systems that will meet or exceed your needs.
The problem with nickel cadmium cells is called cell membrane barrier development which reduces the effective capacity of recharge current depth. They need to be fully discharged and then fully recharged before using. If one use this style and then charges it before it is fully discharge the barrier starts to develop limiting the availability to store a charge. The barrier only sometimes can be broken down by an over voltage applied charge but not always.
NASA says it’s fixed shuttle foam problem
But astronauts can’t patch Columbia-level damage
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5831547/
Snipet last paragraph:
The space agency is aiming for three shuttle flights in 2005 and then five a year through 2010, by which time station construction should be completed. The three remaining shuttles will be retired at that point, and NASA’s focus will shift to flying to the moon and beyond that to Mars.
I do not see Nasa even coming close to the 5 missions a year because of the turn around times after each flight.
Rather than looking for planets and then wondering if life might be there. How about say how large can our planet be in the inhabitable zone from the sun and still support life.
Batteries have a two fold effect when joined to solar array collectors, one is the storage of a charge for later use when the solar panel collections drop off but they also act like a capacitor in that they equalize the charge to an average voltage. So even if you throw out the batteries you would still need a large capacitance bank to equalize the voltage for use under changing loads.
Changing the rotation speed of a gyro changes the counter balancing response time.
If you want to follow up with more articles on this subject go to the MarsNews.com site

http://www.marsnews.com/focus/mars_society/
Recent article list:
5-Aug-04 - Lessons from an Arctic Mars (MSNBC)
4-Aug-04 - The designer suit for Mars (The Sydney Morning Herald)
3-Aug-04 - Flashline MARS Crew Completes Field Season (Mars Socieyt)
2-Aug-04 - Scientists target manned Mars mission (ABC Radio's AM)
29-Jul-04 - Mock Mars spacemen camp on Devon Island (Nunatsiaq News)
So even if the Space Exploration Vision is mandated I still see a problem with execution of it. The first being Funding, the second being NASA and the third being lack of designed equipment to do the job of going.
In baseball that is three strikes and you are out.
Private industry might be able to do the last one but it will be the others that will stop any chance of getting it done.
So we let Hubble die and wait for JSWT around 2011 to be placed at the L1 zone.
Is the reason for the delay of the JSWT technical or is it funding?
If it were funding related then it would be possible to shift the Hubble repair rescue funds to speed up the process of delivery. Such that the time between the demise of Hubble and its placement of the new telescope is kept to a minimum.
True about the large hole cement but if you have ever done any auto bondo work you would know that it will not stay in the hole unless you put in some sort of backing materiel to aid with holding it in place.
Also a protective wrap that is used at launch need not be overly aggressive since it does not see the re-entry heat. We are not looking to protect the ship once in orbit with the wrap only on the way up.
Even figuring the 5 items you mentioned, Which I have no cost figures for and the need for probably a few delta 4 an couple of Atlas V to get it there. We are lookin just in rocket purchase of 500 million to probably 750 million. The operations crew, Fuel and other stuff would just add to the cost of doing this to turn it into something usefull IMO. Ya, the cost could be spread out over a few years but how long should we continue to go slowly.
Ball Aerospace needs room
Company eyes more space in Boulder in coming years
http://www.bouldernews.com/bdc....00.html
snipet:
One example of how times have changed: In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Ball Aerospace helped build solar observation crafts that stood about 5 feet tall. By comparison, NASA's James Webb Space Telescope — to which Ball Aerospace will add an optical subsystem before it launches in 2010 — towers five times that height.
Was Venus Alive? 'The Signs are Probably There'
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/v … 40826.html
Items that can change a good working model into an ineffective or non operative one.
****************************
Fixing culture may be toughest task
http://www.flatoday.com/news....URE.htm
Snipet:
On the spring day when Discovery sits out there on its launch pad waiting to return to space, saying "go" or "no go" for launch won't be so hard.
Wayne Hale, a veteran shuttle flight director, is accustomed to making tough choices on the spot. Instead, for Hale, the stuff to sweat over includes the countless wrenching decisions that must be made during this two-plus years between the last shuttle flight and the next one.
************************
No rubber stamps
http://www.flatoday.com/news....TLE.htm
Snipet:
T-minus seven months and counting, or so NASA hopes.
The agency continues to press for a March or April liftoff of the first post-Columbia shuttle flight, which must go without a hitch for its manned spaceflight program to regain traction and credibility with the public.
It seems like Nasa has no control over its own personel to get the jobs done. Giving up is not a option nor is ignoring the problems.
I myself have sent into the return to flight several ways to overcome ands actually recieved replies of which some have comfirmation that they were following those same suggestions. Now I find that they are giving up on the RCC tile wrap over appoach to repair.
I say how about a wrap over prevention of another harder material than the RCC tiles. Something that does not matter if it degrades an burns off on re-entry or is jetisoned before.
*****************************
Time crunch looms over shuttle fixes
Work remaining on 10 of 15 shuttle return-to-flight initiatives must wrap up by mid-December to meet the March-April launch window
http://www.flatoday.com/news....AIN.htm
*************************************
NASA's backup plan involves rescue shuttles, space station