You are not logged in.
I wondered just how long the russian were going to put up with Nasa and non payment for soyuz utilized to keep the ISS going. Not that much longer according to the AP. Russia Wants Payment for Space Trips
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....station
Well If you plan for a large volume of space movement between the earth and moon then you can create it. Firstly the movement of NASA personnel, construction personnel, mining personnel, scientific personnel, and business activities including space tourism could be created to reduce the overall costs to ferry personnel from the earth to the moon that would provide a lower cost base.
So under the catagory elite you have specialists from NASA personel, scientist and the rich Space tourist.
From the working class you have mining and construction.
Until we can get more from this second group of more common people into space nothing will change.
Well one approach to high rising cost of Rockets from the big guy's is to tell them that we wish to have a price break. I'M sure they will laugh but if one is not given start shopping else where for what is needed. Even funding an upstart company for there designing of what is needed and or giving them working designs to which they would like to purchase for less would spear on competition in the industry.
I know, I'M way out there...
In the equation is not the Mass changing also as fuel is burned?
This has been the best resource that I have found to date on alternative fuel sources.
Andy a projectconstellation space explorer wrote an excellent response to the Hercules Exploration System (SDV) which would use the Ariane 5 derivative for a CEV launch vehicle.
But much like the fact of not being able to pay for the seats on a Rusian soyuz can we purchase said equipment from the Europeans.
My other thought is of launch sites both here and over seas that are capable of launching rockets in that how many are there that would be favorable for use if launch activity were to step up.
Also Robert that would also put the other cancelled projects of the OSP, SLI, the x-38 and other series as viable options for use with the Ariane launcher for the CEV as a Near term solution.
Especially any fully assemble units is a plus.
For andy's response:
Part Two of a three part series on CEV design & launch concepts:
Written by Kevin Waldroup expands on the ideas for Shuttle-C and discusses the possibilities of variants and space station applications using the external tank and other components of the existing shuttle infrastructure.
Kevin's article can be found on this same page also.
http://www.projectconstellation.us/news...._system
This link will get you lots of other alternatives.
http://www.space-rockets.com/wspc.html
Left side bar on web page:
Earth To Orbit
PSAN-I Ammonium Nitrate & Propellants
SHARP Spaceplane
Small Launch Vehicle
Sounding Rockets
Liquid Oxygen Monopropellants
Earth - Lunar Corridor
Lunar Soil Propellant (LSP)
Shuttle Excursion Module (SEM) ™
Shuttle Landing Module (SLM) ™
Lunar Bases & Lunar Concrete
Mars
Mars Rocket Engines
Mars Jet Engines
Here is concept art for the lander from Boeing
http://www.projectconstellation.us/article....alb=sec
Inflatable habitat for an initial lunar surface base, using a derivative Resource Module to land on the lunar surface and providing power and cooling to the Crew.
Frequency is the inverse of time.
So light has limits of min and max for the equation based on energy form that is released.
I agree with you Mad grad student, Why are we waiting and sending so many probes to explore Mars between now and the year 2040 ' ish before Man can go.
I think Fear of the unknown of bacteria, microscopic organisms, of radiation sickness due to poor rocket shielding techniques, length of journey physical and emotional strain are just some of the over concerns that some would have.
Next would be cost to not only develop the rockets but the needed equipment to stay.
Then finally when enough of Mars has been populated is a fear of self governing movement by those there.
On Mars we will still need to have motorized vehicles to travel the surface and that still requires fuels research.
Also solar power is less effective on Mars than on earth for the same size cell panels.
Nuclear may be a possibility but how will one construct such reactors from Mars Materials with no mining or smelting operations.
With only one or two flights a year there will be very little infrastucture building no automation of build or supply and very little will change with regards to space flight being of less cost than it is at this time. Space will still remain out of reach for the average space explorer.
There must be more flights to drive pricing down....
Here is a resource on scramjet
http://www.tipmagazine.com/tip/INPHFA/v … type=ALERT
Here is a resource on scramjet
http://www.tipmagazine.com/tip/INPHFA/v … type=ALERT
I know that follow up experiments from the airforce were to try and use jet fuels in the scram jet engine.
Also would not a modulated system of kerosene and lox with scram jet technology be of benefit at lift off if one starts with lox and then switches over to mixing in the compressed air after launch and then to finally just scram intake air.
Radiation like in x-rays, Gamma ...
Like in lethal...
So Nasa is making this available for free... Where is the self funding approach in that.
I believe that Nasa was trying to go towards the Federally funded research and design ceter approach. Why wait if it is possible to start generating a brand new revenue stream..
The nations space programs right now can not purchase anything of the kind such as a soyuz or a progress from Russia regardless of the price.
How can we get the private industry to go for such concepts?
Could we buy from our Eurpean freinds the Automated Transfer Vehicle or do we have that same issue as before?
Truely the use of nuclear propulsion will most likely not be from the Earths surface to orbit but rather once in orbit to our far off destination of Mars.
Moon use would only be a trial use only and not very practical for cost versus chemical rockets, since it is such a small comparitally speaking distance as compared to Mars.
FYI
We already know how to transfer these items in zero- g as indicated and As noted in this article Russian Progress cargo ship docks with ISS.
http://www.spacedaily.com/2004/04052714 … 6t02y.html
I agree with both RobertDyck in that the use of insitu fuels is a must to lower the exploration costs.
comstar03 also makes a lot of sense in that we can learn alot from those old shows such like space 1999 and others.
Nitrogen is an inert gas, are there any other inert gases that could be found in the Lunar soil? Could nitrogen or some other inert gas also be cheaper to transport from earth to any lunar operations for use.
If it did not take so long for a journey to Jupiter or Saturn, you might be able to siphon off some of there atmosphere for use else where.
How about catching comets or searching for other forms of icy bodies?
I know, I'm a little out there.... open thinking some times can go a long way to solving problems...
How can we get Nasa to implement such ideas?
The nations space programs right now can not purchase anything of the kind from Russia regardless of the price.
How can we get the private industry to go for such concepts?
Could we buy from our Eurpean freinds the Automated Transfer Vehicle or do we have that same issue as before?
I like how all of you are thinking out of the Box but how can we get Nasa to implement such ideas.
The nations space programs right now can not purchase anything of the kind from Russia regardless of the price.
How can we get the private industry to go for such concepts?
Could we buy from our European friends the Automated Transfer Vehicle or do we have that same issue as before?
RobertDyck:
I like the thought process for why bring things not needed for a lunar landing.
Also to develop ships that use lunar fuel resources rather than Fuels that are only available from Earth is I feel down the right path as well.
I also think we should explore the use of the Space elevator and the magnetic rail guns launch systems for Lunar use as well.
The problem of how we solve to be able to do manned flight will come but making a profit by government run agencies will not.
That is where private industry must be allowed access to all technical design specifications maybe for a price but in order to allow a stepping stone of developement to occur not a reengineering to developement.
Also the next question is to what market will generate a profit one of tourism, mining, or just plain old settlement?