New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society plus New Mars Image Server

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations via email. Please see Recruiting Topic for additional information. Write newmarsmember[at_symbol]gmail.com.

#301 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-06 14:01:24

Terraformer wrote:

However, a lot, if not most, of the states are constructs of the federal government. Hence why they have rectangular borders.

states_imgmap.jpg
Could be something to that, though the only perfectly rectangular state is Colorado. Also most of those states with straight borders are west of the Mississippi.

#302 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-06 13:56:28

RobertDyck wrote:

Tom, the land of Georgia is Georgia's. The land of Louisiana is Louisiana's. The United States of America is an alliance of independent states that chose to work together for common defense.

Then how come your so resistant to Canada joining this "Alliance?"

In many ways the federal government of the United States has a lot less authority than Canada's. This wasn't "the King's land", it was the land of the people.

And the black slaves of Georgia were people! This position you have is a decidedly illiberal position for someone who calls himself a liberal! Are you saying people are property? I'd like to see you stand next to a black Canadian citizen and express that opinion and just look at his reaction to it, that would be amusing!

But I guess I shouldn't be surprised; your attitude is the same one that took land from the Indians.

The question is which people count as people and which don't! Now if one is going to go around buying and selling human being as slaves, what do you think their attitude towards the Indians was? The Only reason blacks were brought to America was because Indians kept on getting sick and dying whenever there was an attempt to enslave them! Also most of the land we stole from the Indians was before the Civil War and by Democratic Pro-Slave Administrations. It was during a Democratic Administration, that of James Madison that it was decided to invade your country Canada! No Republican Administration ever did such a thing!

The Civil War resulted in more deaths than any war in history before it. It was the first war fought with rifles. Your attitude is what resulted in all that carnage.

You should appreciate the sacrifices we made to eliminate slavery and to save the Union from people that wanted to corrupt it with slavery. Look what happened to the Roman Republic and Empire, they never eliminated slavery, and see how that brought down Roman Civilization!
Not to nip pick, but the Kentucky Long Rifle was used during the American Revolutionary War.
50297d1362764830-greatest-guns-great-kentucky-rifle_pg.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_rifle

#303 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-06 10:18:15

Plenty of room to lay out more Solar Panels to get this job done, plenty of sunlight too. Solar panels cost just about as much as anything else you might haul to the Moon, the main consideration is mass, not cost to manufacture. I still think a nuclear reactor would cost more than the number of Solar Panels you'd need t recharge the fuel cells. Also what about lithium-ion batteries?

#304 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-06 09:45:49

RobertDyck wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Actually we didn't start this war, they did!

It's more complicated than that. It started by a group of extremists wanting foreign soldiers off their soil.

Wikipedia: Al-Qaeda

The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in August 1990 had put...the world's most valuable oil fields were within easy striking distance of Iraqi forces in Kuwait... Bin Laden offered the services of his mujahideen to King Fahd to protect Saudi Arabia from the Iraqi army. The Saudi monarch refused bin Laden's offer, opting instead to allow US and allied forces to deploy troops into Saudi territory. The deployment angered bin Laden, as he believed the presence of foreign troops in the "land of the two mosques" (Mecca and Medina) profaned sacred soil.

The Wikipedia article conveniently skips over years of escalating conflict between Bill Clinton and al-Qaeda. The article is marked "This section needs expansion."

And don't blame all Muslims. Just because bin Laden wanted all Muslims to become radical, doesn't mean he had the authority to do that. In fact, under Muslim rules he didn't have authority to do squat.

Fatwas

Neither bin Laden nor al-Zawahiri possessed the traditional Islamic scholarly qualifications to issue a fatwa. However, they rejected the authority of the contemporary ulema (which they saw as the paid servants of jahiliyya rulers), and took it upon themselves.

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

the United States did some terrible things to the South during the Civil War, again that war wasn't our idea, it was theirs, they wanted their secession, and we had t[o] preserve the Union, it was a matter of survival and a nation for us!

Again, bullshit! America is supposed to be the "Land of the free". That means no one is forced to be there at the point of a gun.

And the Lincoln Administration did not force any Southerner to stay in the United States if he didn't want to, they could have fled to Mexico or South America, and some did after the Civil War.

The states joined of their own free will, they have a right to leave that way too.

They could have saved themselves and us a lot of grief if they just took their slaves and moved to South America with them. One might ask however, what about the slaves' free will?

The case was taken to the Supreme Court, but before the Court could hear the case, some hot-heads started the war. Some northern general decided to take everything they could carry from one military base to another military base in southern territory that was under construction at that time, consolidating military might. But southern generals demanded that all military bases within southern territory must be surrendered to the Confederacy.

Well you see, those Southern Generals were not part of the United States military's chain of command, they resigned their commissions from the US Military, so therefore the US Generals were not subordinate to them no matter how high a rank they held in the Confederate military.

That is an issue that should have been settled by the Supreme Court. Of course land within the Confederacy would remain part of the Confederacy, the only question was disposition of equipment.

But the United States did not cede any of that land to them, and Fort Sumter was US government property!

But a few hot-head generals on both sides escalated until shots were fired,

Well I think someone fired those cannons, they did not fire themselves, the most likely culprit was a Democrat of course!

and the war began. You could easily blame northern generals for trying to claim military bases within southern territory should remain owned by the north. You could blame the general who reinforced Fort Sumter. There's a lot of blame on both sides. But your comment shows you are one of the hot-heads trying to repeat the same mistakes that started the war.

The United States did not hand over the fort or any of the land to the Confederates, so legally they did not have a right to be there, not did they have a license for those cannons, some of which by the way was stolen property of the US Army!

You know Robert, I thought you were a Canadian, not a Southerner! Did all those escaped slaves make a mistake by fleeing to Canada? I wonder? I'm not going to use the "r-word" but I wonder what some black Canadians might think of your pro-southern point of view, or the fact that some of those southerners may have owned some of their ancestors!

#305 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-06 09:28:43

Let me remind you, the Space Shuttle was powered by fuel cells, and sometimes missions have lasted as long as 2 weeks, that should about cover the Lunar night, and then we can lay out extra solar panels to recharge them during the day.

#306 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-06 04:33:56

Well the Moon actually blocks half of all cosmic rays, you get less cosmic rays sitting on the surface of the Moon than you do in free space. Night time means that astronauts need to carry flashlights and need thick soles on the boots to protect their feet from the cold ground. Vacuum otherwise makes a very good insulator, it is probably easier to keep warm in he dark on the Moon than on Mars at night, the thin atmosphere does give the suit a little extra work in maintaining is internal temperature. These are only problems if you are in places where there is not constant sunshine on the Moon. The place to build a base I clearly at the poles, if you want o rely on Solar power. One can make excursions to other places while they are lit. There is also energy storage possibilities.

#307 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-05 20:17:33

SpaceNut wrote:

That makes us no better than the terrorist thinking as in an EYE for an EYE way of thinking.....
We are already changing parts of there culture as woman can drive in places, get education ect...
A wall is a Maginot line not just a border divider...when there are observatory posts along it.....

Actually we didn't start this war, they did! We wouldn't even be fighting it if they didn't start it against us! if there was no 9/11 attack, we would not be in Iraq, and Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein would likely still be in power or his sons would be in power or he would be overthrown, but we wouldn't have anything to do with the place unless he decided to misbehave towards his neighbors again. the United States did some terrible things to the South during the Civil War, again that war wasn't our idea, it was theirs, they wanted their secession, and we had t preserve the Union, it was a matter of survival and a nation for us! I think the moral imperative is to end the war as quickly as possible, and since the war is waged against us, the only way to end the war is to get the Enemy to stop attacking us, and they haven't stopped of their own accord. We could stop them by destroying them, if they are no more, then the war ends!

#308 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-05 20:10:56

Terraformer wrote:

I don't think a suicide bomber cares what you're going to do afterwards.

A suicide bomber is basically a Drone made out of flesh and blood, he has his programmers that send him out to kill people, presumably he I going to care what you do afterwards. The Japanese had a lot of suicide bombers, but after we dropped those two atomic bombs, they still surrendered, they all didn't want to die! The society that supported those suicide bombers (aka kamikazes, and Bonsai warriors), quit when they saw that their society might not survive if the did not surrender after those two atomic bombs. After they lost all hope for victory, no matter what the sacrifice, they gave up, this is what we need to do to the Islamic societies that support the terror war against us.

#309 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-05 20:01:34

The Moon is no more hostile than any other place in near Earth Space. Probably the easiest place to establish a base would be the Lunar poles. Sending cargo to the Moon is one thing, sending people to the Moon is something else. It would be cheaper to send people to the Moon than to Mars, because people need life support and cargo does not. When you transport a person to Mars, the equipment you need to keep him alive to get there has more mass than the equipment you need on the Moon. Also anyone on the Moon is still orbiting the Earth, you just have the little matter of achieving Lunar Escape Velocity, and you have a three day trip back to Earth at anytime. If an emergency happens at a Lunar base, evacuation is easy. Also the return to Earth from the Moon requires less delta-v than the return to Earth from Mars, as the Earth has an atmosphere for slowing down in both cases.

#310 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-05 08:37:43

Terraformer wrote:

Eh. I know Musk is set on Mars, but I think building up infrastructure in LEO, Luna, and cis-Lunar space is the first thing to do. When we have propellent depots and dry docks, and more experience at doing stuff in space (inb4 someone mentions the ISS, which has given us no experience with centrifuges, in-space manufacturing, propellent transfer, or even washing clothing), it will be much easier and cheaper to launch a Mars mission.

Or you could try hauling everything from Terra. Use your super-conestoga  wagon, as the settlers did when moving west, hauling everything they needed including fodder for the horses.

That is want Musk want to do. The Moon is just another destination for him.
dc89609fff403c83ba246ea20ef853dd.jpg
remember this map? 13,670 m/sec for Mars. 15,070 m/sec for the Moon, if you add the numbers on the subway map. The thing is Mars has an atmosphere to conduct braking maneuver, the Moon does not. To get to the Moon, you have to do everything with rockets while Mars gives you a freebee for slowing down. Thus you need to expend more propellant to send a given tonnage to the Moon, than to Mars. Sending something to the Moon to build infrastructure to get to Mars just doesn't make sense. Mars has more of everything than the Moon does. The thing about the Moon that is important to us is its proximity, if you are living on the Moon, you have almost real time communication to Earth, so close in fact that you can have a real time phone conversation between the Moon and Earth as President Nixon did one time with astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin during the Apollo 11 mission

#311 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-05 08:32:51

Terraformer wrote:

Seriously, Tom? It should be clear to everyone that we don't have security, just security theatre.

There's a game I like to play by myself in duty free whenever I'm at an airport. I call it "Are you smarter than a terrorist?". The goal is to try and figure out how to improvise weaponry from what they'll let you purchase and take on a plane. Obviously I don't actually do it, or talk about it - airport security believes stopping people mentioning a problem actually stops the problem, and I don't want to get arrested. Still, it's fun coming up with improvised flamethrowers (can you believe they sell flammable substances in airports? I'm sure I've seen it), shivs, tasers...

You playing the wrong game, the trick is not to stop the terrorist from what he wants to do, the trick it to retaliate for what he has done! If whoever sent the terrorists wants a war, we give him a war he cannot win! We take the war to him, and make him regret sending the terrorist in the first place. We have a list of terrorist countries that sponsor terrorism, so whenever a terrorist attack happens, we punish them until the terrorism stops! The Iranians have been chanting "Death to America" it seems forever, but we've never actually been in a war with them, we've fought their proxies, but never them! Maybe its time that changed!

#312 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-05 08:24:13

louis wrote:

I think you're confusing flying and colonising. To get on a Jumbo Jet, is not the same as signing up for a lifelong pressurised habitat environment on a planet 60 million miles away, saying goodbye forever to your extended family. A minority of people will be attracted to that, but they will not likely be the people with the right technical skills and temperament.

The same was true of the Pilgrims as well, they left their extended family behind in your country, England! Being in a pressurized habitat is simply a detail. Anyway the inhabitants of Mars will have much better communication with their Mother planet than the Pilgrims did with England! For Martian colonists, communication is limited to the speed of light, for the Pilgrims it was the speed of the fastest wooden sailing ship!

#313 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-04 23:55:08

That is because we haven't eliminated the Enemy! What were doing at airports is comparable to the Maginot line that France built to guard against German attack in the aftermath of World War I.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maginot_Line
France built a wall to stop the Germans, they relied on fixed fortifications rather than on building an Army that could defeat the Germans if it came to War. Putting up security at airports is insufficient, as there are always soft targets that terrorists can find. The real way to end the war is to go out an destroy the Enemy! Make the Enemy pay through the nose for every attack they make against us, and make they pay a terrible price that they cannot sustain, and then they will learn they cannot attack us!

#314 Re: Not So Free Chat » Election Meddling » 2017-02-04 23:40:51

SpaceNut wrote:

Did you all know that your tax dollars for the candidacy of Trump did not go into ads or other such means to connect with the voters but rather it went into his pockets of the business that he owns under his own direct use as payments to his business.
The confict of interest for this will continue through to his next chance for re-election as he has registered already to be a candidate.

New documents show Trump retains direct tie to businesses Trump is the sole beneficiary of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust....

More corporate shell games and all he needs to say with each visit to what he owns is I am going to my constiuents for the future candacy run, or I am on government business...charge it to the government payable to Donald Trump....

So are emails leaked better or worse than the White House Trump calls to Australia, Mexico into how embarrassing details of recent tense phone conversations with these counterpart...phone call with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull after an acrimonious discussion about a refugee swap deal, a conversation that threatened ties between the two allies after details appeared in The Washington Post or that an earlier call with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto about paying for a wall on the southern U.S. border, Trump said he might send the U.S. military to Mexico to stop drug cartels - details from a transcript obtained by a Mexican news organization Aristegui Noticias and the Associated Press.

By the way this is where we have fencing and do not....
https://a-stamen.graphiq.com/terrain/5/6/13.png

You fail to mention that it was Obama's deal to swap Central American immigrants and send them to Mexico in exchange for Australia sending us their radical Muslim immigrants, that the do not want, from Indonesia so they can come here and kill Americans! You left that part out. Obama is upset that we are protected by two oceans, which many Muslims cannot afford to cross. Islam is an Old World religion, the religion of the New World is mostly Christianity, there is not a single Muslim country here! Obama wants to pay for their tickets to come here, he sees them killing Europeans by bombs, guns and running them over with trucks, and he thinks America is missing all that fun!

You know I first learned about Muslims at the time of the Iranian Hostage Crisis in 1979?

The Mexican government by the way denies that Trump threatened to invade Mexico, that was misreported! We are receiving a lot of false reports by an unhappy and angry Media that is upset that the election didn't go their way, they thought they had smoothed a path for Hillary Clinton the White House, and they are very upset that it didn't happen, so now they are lying through their teeth. By the way, whats it going to do to our Mars aspirations when you are busy alienating the one person who could be a big help in getting a humans to Mars program going? Has Obama ever shown any interest in doing that? Do you want o wait 4 years and do your darnedest to get Trump impeached and removed from office, and then hope that whoever replaces him is someone who is pro-space and a Democrat? Do you want to see people on Mars or are you just going to fight Trump tooth and nail for the next four years?  You need to realize the Media is nursing a grudge and is not doing its job in truthfully reporting news about Trump! They want to control who becomes the next President and they feel they los that power to the American People.

#315 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-04 23:31:58

Not a typical Muslim. I see women like this:
burka-woman-muslim-girl-muslim-woman-islam.jpg
and women like this:
hijab-stock-photo.jpg
At our airports all he time. There are more and more of them coming every year, they are demur, they are submissive to their husbands and fathers, their marriages are arranged, and the only thing the women's movement cares about now is the right to kill unborn babies. In 1865, we abolished slavery, now Muslim men are brining in women who are trained from birth to be their slaves, what does this do to liberated women when they see these "burka women" in supermarkets and airports? Do they think they have other rights than the right to kill their babies? What do you think is happening with these Muslim women while their western counterparts are aborting their children? The Muslim women are having four and five children a piece, and the girls are being trained to be submissive to their masters and eventually they will our number the western women that value their rights, women's rights will move backwards as muslims vote them back into second class status, this has happened in Iran, it has happened in Lebanon, it has happened in Egypt and other places in the Middle East.

Now what were these women doing on the 1st full day of the Trump Presidency? We had Madonna cursing and yelling obscentities to a crowd of people. There was the poor limousine owner that had his car burned by protestors in Washington DC. Unlike the Tea Party, their left wing counterparts like to burn things down, commit acts of violence and destroy property while they march! There is a lot of hate and anger here, and I think Obama and Clinton planned this whole thing in advance! And they go about cooking up stories about the Russians! What do they want? A military coup? What happens to our democratic system after that military coup? I guess it would be up to the generals wouldn't it! Was Trump really so terrible that you would rather have a military junta in his place? Has he really turned out to be the Nazi that so many people said he was?

#316 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-04 23:09:20

RobertDyck wrote:

You could start by stop dropping bombs on their cities.

Its starts by them calling a halt to all terror attacks! They started it on 9/11! If we no longer need those extra security precautions at our nation's airports then the war is over. The last time I flew in an airplane was in 2001 right before the attack on 9/11. If we ever get back to the procedures that existed before that attack, then we truly know that the terror war is over! The other side let that genie out of the bottle, the unleashed the dogs of war and terrorism on us, now it is their responsibility to stuff that genie back into the bottle and undo the damage they have done to our civilization! if they can't do that, well maybe they should have thought of it before they started it. Ending the war is their job and their responsibility, since they started it on 9/11 in the first place! Do they want to come the negotiating table and put an end to the war they started? Let them!

#317 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-04 22:59:43

Is this how the Pilgrims started their colony? My time horizon does not go past 30 years. I kind of view technological progress as a clogged pipe, for the last 30 years things have been clogged, and pressure is building and building and inevitably we're going to have an explosion! Each year where nothing happens makes the next year than much more likely that there is going to be a technological explosion. You view instead is slow and steady for the last 30 years, slow and steady for the next 30 years. Well the previous 30 years before the last 30 years was not slow and steady:
1957-1987, 1987-2017, 2017-2047 So flip a coin, are the next 30 years going to be more like the last 30 years or is it going to be more like the 30 years before that in the rate of technological change?

Lets say you flip a coin and it comes out "tails", that means in the next 30 years, that is on television, we may be seeing 4 astronauts walking on Mars, it might be the first or second mission to Mars, the Astronauts will have a NASA mission patch on their space suits, one of them might be from the ESA, and the fourth may be from Russia or China, and people will stay glued to their television sets as they watch these astronauts set foot on Mars, and when they come back, they are greeted with ticker tape parades and a visit to the White House, girls chase after them when they get back, and they experience marial trouble with their wives because of all that instant celebrity and attention. Mean while in Congress there is debate on the cost of this Massive Mars program, its costing hundreds of billions of dollars, and a famous senator is asking, "do we really need to be spending this much on sending four astronauts to the surface of Mars to collect rocks?" This is Future number 1, it is rather disappointing and unimpressive future if you ask me, and I hope this is not the case.

Now lets say you flip your coin and it comes out heads, this is the scenario that signifies:
Jerry and Martha are packing their clothes into their suitcases, their mother comes into the room and says, "I'm sorry dear, but there is no room for dogs on Mars, we'll have to leave him with Uncle Henry, Maybe in five years we can send for him, it should b 7 months in a spaceship and then we land on Mars! The Von Braun settlement already has 20,000 settlers, they are building a new school and a library as we speak. it really is hard to keep up with the influx of people."

#318 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-04 20:36:41

louis wrote:
Oldfart1939 wrote:

I remain somewhat skeptical of Musk's grandiose plans, especially the 100 passenger space ship. There definitely needs be some intermediate "proof of concept," and "pathfinder" vehicle as an intermediate step. The amount of food needed by 100 colonists is almost unimaginable when one does the calculations. As much as I'm a "fan" of Elon and SpaceX, he needs a hard dose of reality.
An intermediate vehicle capable of carrying 12 humans and a lot of food should be a first step, but the first several flights carrying crews of 7 and needed equipment. Maybe by the mid 2030's we could begin bringing larger numbers, but otherwise, proceed carefully and somewhat cautiously. Criticism of the Zubrin Mars Direct architecture is unfounded. Reusability is definitely a goal to pursue, but probably not in the first 2-3 Hohmann transfer opportunities after the hardware becomes available. A goal of first establishing a VIABLE  human presence needs to be accomplished, followed by colonization. Not trying to be a wet blanket, but a rational and realistic critic. There's nothing wrong with 'Thinking Big," if tempered with a dose of reality.

Food would be about 54 tonnes. But I guess that could be reduced with use of dried foods and water recycling.  100 x 140 lb (smallish) people would come in at 14 tonnes. Not a lot of room to play with if the cargo limit is 100 tonnes.

My concern about Space X's plans is not so much the technical feasibility but the human feasibility.

There really aren't that many people on Earth who tick all the right boxes for early colonists and delivering humans - supppsedly permanent settles -  in large numbers very quickly will create a kind of critical mass of very human problems: peple 

My view is we should be thinking in terms of permanent human settlement (but not with permanent stays by individuals). A target of 100 in 20 years and 1000 in 40 years, 10,000 in 70 years, then 100,000 in 100 years might be realistic.

How many people flew in airplanes by the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brother's first flight at Kitty Hawk?

#319 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-04 14:05:22

Muslims can do more to end the Jihad against the West, like not make it socially acceptable to advocate violence against Jews or to find excuses for it! Frankly we are fed up with Muslim violence and choose to express it in different ways, w let the Muslim community know! What is wrong with that? At least they can pass it along to their more violent brethren. I am sick and tired of some Muslim Jihadist saying "God is Great" and them blowing himself up and killing bunch of people. I am sick of it and I want them to cut it out!

#320 Re: Unmanned probes » Using the SLS for outer Solar System exploration? » 2017-02-04 13:05:37

Oldfart1939 wrote:

We've been stuck in LEO for 50 years! Any use of the SLS should be, considering the cost, have much more ambitious goals. We certainly don't need it for the ISS, since both SpaceX and Orbital ATK have that covered. The "planned" asteroid fragment retrieval seems to be an awful waste of capability in contrast to dollars spent; there needs be a more ambitious scientific purpose in mind!

Well there is the next generation telescope. The SLS could lift a large telescope which may be able to find extrasolar planets, that would be well worth an SLS.

#321 Re: Unmanned probes » Using the SLS for outer Solar System exploration? » 2017-02-04 13:04:10

Oldfart1939 wrote:

These probes must also have adequate power for data transmission. An awful (wasteful) amount of the weight and volume is comprised by solar panels. TGIs are not enough. Small Nuclear Reactors are the wave of the future. It makes no sense at all to develop great instrumentation and then lack adequate power to return the data other than in driblets.

Why have I suggested Callisto? Easy: the only Galilean moon of Jupiter which is long-term habitable and relatively unaffected by the Jovian Van Allen Belt radiation. It has reasonable gravity and a trace atmosphere. It's also at the limits for a manned mission, if nuclear thermal rockets are used (Nerva engine). Another possible lander/rover destination might be Ceres?

What I'm looking for is maximum scientific return for the money spent.

Then there is Titan, a most unusual moon.

#322 Re: Unmanned probes » Using the SLS for outer Solar System exploration? » 2017-02-04 13:01:55

SpaceNut wrote:

I sort of like the idea of using the SLS to launch probes quicker to places that take forever using ION drives and Chemical engines that do not have the fuel to really accelerate them there quicker.
The trouble with Nasa thou is these would not be discovery class but Flagship missions which they are famous for at a billion plus a pop....

Time to hand over a copy of the prints to Space x with a request to turn it into a lower cost heavy lift BFR....

I think Titan deserves a flagship mission, I would say a rover/orbiter mission. Lets get some high resolution maps of the entire surface of Titan!. We need an orbiter to orbit Titan just above its atmosphere. The orbiter would also act as a communications satellite to relay information from the rover to Earth I think the Titan Rover should be similar to Curiosity on Mars, it would be powered by a radiothermo generator. Another question is whether we should have a flying rover? Titan's atmosphere is much thicker than on Mars, it should allow probes to fly. I think we would want a probe that can craw, fly, and swim. We might want to check out the bottoms of liquid hydrocarbon lakes and rivers, we might want to fly over them, and we might want wheels as well. What do you think?

#323 Re: Not So Free Chat » Politics » 2017-02-04 09:57:36

RobertDyck wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Do you think Osama Bin Laden was innocent?

You are a moron. You Tom. You are a moron. CIA created their own demon, and you somehow treat that as "innocent".

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

You want to know what a martyr is, that is a martyr, not some scumbag terrorist who murders people! I think the Muslim definition of martyr is different from the Christian one.

Again, you are a moron. What you think does not matter. Calling all Muslims "scumbag" means you are racist, and you are the one starting war.

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Each time the number of new recruits exceeded those killed.

That is because we haven't killed enough!

That means ending this war starts by killing you.

You are misquoting me, I said all terrorists are scumbags! Here is the exact quote if your interested:

You want to know what a martyr is, that is a martyr, not some scumbag terrorist who murders people! I think the Muslim definition of martyr is different from the Christian one.

What I am waiting for is for Muslims to reject these terrorists than some of them call "Heroes!" I want them to take down all of their monuments to these murders in the West Bank and Gaza! I think terrorists are scumbags and if I offended any terrorists too bad. I am not saying all Muslims are scumbags unless you suggest that all Muslims support terrorists. I met some Muslims who I think do not support terrorists, but if they make excuses for terrorists and seek to justify their actions, then I consider them to be no better than the terrorists, they create the society that allow them to exist and be accepted, they give these terrorists the support network they need so they can go through with ending their lives so they can end the lives of other people! And I state again, we can only end the war by winning it, and if these fanatics don't surrender and turn themselves in, we will have to kill them. We need to let some Muslims know that they made a terrible mistake by supporting this Jihad of terrorism, this is the war I want to end. I don't see how we can end it at the negotiating table because these terrorists won't compromise, they won't accept anything less than our total surrender, and so long as they don't get that and remain alive, they will keep on attacking us.

#324 Re: Human missions » Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan » 2017-02-04 09:32:01

Well it fits with his plan of a trillion dollar infrastructure program using public-private partnerships. SpaceX is a for profit company, that means some of the money for certain space programs can come from private sources, so long as a feasible plan to earn a profit is put forward. What private investors invest, the government doesn't spend. Seems to me a reusable rocket could be profitable, the article also mentions using similar technology for point to point transportation on Earth with a reusable rocket. This will beat air travel, you can travel anywhere on Earth's surface in less than an hour, from New York to New Zealand for instance. Airplanes would become obsolete except for short distances. I wonder what an international spaceport would look like based on SpaceX technology, does it have multiple launch and landing pads? It would seem to require one for each rocket. the rockets would not be able to taxi to the gate, passengers would have to walk up to the launch pad and take an elevator to the passenger cabin, they would then climb up a ladder to their seats, slide on their backs to their acceleration couches, and strap themselves in as they get ready for launch. Then the rocket would blast off making a lot of noise, after a bit the first stage would separate and return to the spaceport, while the second stage continues on a ballitic trajectory above the atmosphere, it would then turn around and retroburn into the atmosphere, then land on a landing pad, the passengers would then disembark down a ladder or stairway.

The Moon would also be easily within reach with ITS technology. A Moon mission starts off like a Mars mission only it would be much shorter The rocket launches goes into orbit, the bottom stage lands, a tanker stage is loaded, then it launches again, meeting the upper stage to refuel, then it goes into translunar injection, lands on the Moon, maybe it can refuel with some lunar oxygen and then blast off for Earth again. Seems it might have to stage and leave parts of itself behind on the Moon until some local refueling sources can be developed. Oxygen is plentiful, carbon and hydrogen for making methane is more scarce. Perhaps fuel can be delivered to lunar orbit.

#325 Re: Terraformation » Landmaking » 2017-02-04 00:22:22

It would be treated the same under international law as a ship, I believe much as an oil platform is.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB