New Mars Forums

I think that NASA should start working on designs for permanent bases, rather than these mobile technical monstrosities.

Call me naive, but I didn't know that. I had assumed...

Of course it will be catered! Only the finest freeze dried food available and as for the the steak-in-a-tube, all I can say is dee-licious!

Send people? I'm available. How about you guys?

Hey, if a nut job can get us cruising to the moon in style, then I'm all for it!

Thanks for the links. If this doesn't pan out, like the majority of ideas in the nascent space industry, I am going to be very upset. But as you said, he has LOTS of money, and actual "Transhab" hardware.

No problem, Rxke. I remember reading that a while ago and getting really excited. I had no idea that development was so far along!

I can't tell whether the fourth photo down on that site is a rendering or not. If not, I wonder if it's actual working hardware, or just a mockup?

Clark, where did you hear about his goal to build a cruise ship? That sounds very interesting. Maybe there is in fact a new space race, but this time between the private sector and the US Govt.

Yeah, IMAX is 70mm - 35mm is the standard film size. (It's okay, I had to look up the standard film size just now - you gotta love Google).

Given enough resources, we'd have floating O'Neil colonies in orbit AROUND Mars  :;):. We can dream, can't we?

And actually, Cassini started development back in the '80s, so who can really say when they froze the design specifications. It could be running with a chip from 20 years ago! Oh, the horror! In all seriousness, how long does it take to get something 'space approved'? How difficult is it to radiation-harden something and given NASA's new mission, shouldn't getting advanced, reliable computer systems on the spacecraft be a priority? (I know, Apollo had less computing power than a 4-function calculator)

You know, you've got me thinking about my first computer now. I can remember it like yesterday. It was 25mhz (a 286) with a 5 megabyte hard drive...it ran DOS and :gasp: Windows 3.0! Oh, and the 5.5" floppy - when the disks really were floppy! I'm sure others will cite older systems, but hey, I'm only 19 

Transorbital! Yes! That's the one. But you are definitely correct about it being the most static page. However, the company must hold some water if Hewlett-Packard is investing in it - see http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press … 5a.html]HP iPAQ Pocket PCs to be Onboard TransOrbital's First Commercial Moon Mission

As for the IMAX camera, a digital HD cam and IMAX camera are different beasts all together. The IMAX camera uses very large film stock, whereas a digital HD cam would use solid state storage. So, the size for HD could be considerably smaller than IMAX. Granted, as you mentioned, storage and power (electrical and computational) are still issues to overcome, but I am sure that given enough resources...

If Bigelow provides these inflatable structures to NASA, which I assume they will (as they are superior to the tin-can habitat designs in weight, size, and strength) then it looks as if the commerical aspect of the new space vision is shaping up very nicely.  I also seem to remember reading an article somewhere saying that Bigelow actually already HAD a contract to supply these to NASA..but I don't recall where I saw it.

If the owner of a hotel chain can supply NASA with hardware, then anyone can! This definitely is a step in the right direction. Now, if only Mr. Hilton would start investing in that Lunar Hotel...

Recent probes such as the MERs and Cassini have returned some breathtaking imagery from the surface and orbit of other worlds and the public is eating it up. NASA's Mars websites have been inundated with people and I'm sure the returns from Cassini will be just as popular. However, with recent advances in compression such as MPEG-4 and H.264 (http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/h264.html) and solid-state storage technologies, when will someone have the sense to include a high definition video camera on one of these missions? I am aware that these missions have tight bandwidth and weight requirements, but the truth of the matter is that the public does not get excited by data sets. People get excited by multimedia.

At the recent Aldridge Commission hearings, many people testified that in order for the new Vision to work, the American public needs to own it. They need to be excited by it. I'm sorry to say that in a world of DVDs and HDTV broadcasts, the low quality video currently seen sent down from the ISS on occasion (the recent spacewalk, etc.) is not good enough. How compelling do you think high-quality footage of orbital insertion or landing would be? How amazing would it be to see a human set foot on the surface of the Moon or Mars at a resolution of 1920 x 1080 pixels? This footage could be used directly for so many purposes - science museums, documentaries, Hollywood productions. Of course, it would be expensive to design custom hardware for such a purpose, but I believe the benefits to public perception would far outweigh the associated costs and technical difficulties. Remember the deal NASA had with Dreamtime a few years back, before the company went under? Is anyone aware of similar arrangements at the present time?

Thoughts?

(Also, what ever happened to that lunar lander, for the life of me I can't remember the name or company, that was supposed to return HD footage from the lunars surface?)