New Mars Forums

Oil price has risen to $135 a barrel and this will have a real effect on everyone on this forums lives.

Is it the fault of OPEC actually in this case not. Though demand has risen there is no real reason for this price hike except for rampant speculation and by traders bets on prices going up becoming a self fulfilling phrophecy.

For now......Bubbles burst you know ask the South seas corporation or the Tulip bubble or the dot com bubble.

ESA is gaining experience in orbit rendevouz and similar operations. There are plans to turn the ATV into a light spacestation. This would be done by docking two or three together. And a new booster does not really need to be created as they could well use the principal of in orbit refueling and send a lighter spacecraft into space.

Still I suspect that ESA is looking at NASA and wondering if they will be able to keep to there timetable as I am. It seems that ESA is considering the ability to send its own astronauts to space as a means to strengthen there political hand and that any American drive for the Moon will then take them on as significant partners.

ESA planned for the Columbus module of the ISS to be significantly larger and to have its own power and maneuvering systems. This though was vetoed by NASA as it did not want the Shuttle to appear irrelevant in supplying modules to the ISS. The result was that the Hiatus after the shuttle accidents seriously impacted the timeframe and ESA had a built module and a series of supply craft mostly ready that where not needed for quite a while.

It is in this context that ESA will look as to how it will aproach becoming a partner to return to the Moon and ESA has to also look at just how much support NASA really has to be able to achieve its stated goals.

The reason that we are still using disposable space craft is that they are a tried and tested technology and one where we do not have to put a lot of money into designing new hardware. It is literally a chicken and egg scenario we do not need to develop cheap RLV access to space until we need to put a lot of people routinely (Read Daily) into space and we can't put a lot of people into space until we have cheap RLV.

GCNRevenger is correct that the cheapest RLV is a single stage craft when it comes down to routine access but we do not have that technology now and it will be very costly to develop. Im an advocate for a TSTO RLV where we get the advantages of a better mass fraction and one where we can still get quick turn around as we keep both aircraft as that is what the lower stage is. Examples of such craft are Saenger 1 and Bristol Spaceplanes Spacebus.

The idea for mass population movement is to get as close to Airline use out of these craft as possible. If we can do that it will drastically cut the cost of people to orbit and of course cargo too. Of course it still comes down to what do we need that many people moving in and out of orbit daily for.

A lot of our manufacturing techniques on the Moon will be to utilise the free power of the sun. Certainly focusing the sunlight will give very high tempatures and a very efficient way to cut materials as well as to cinter road ways and to create structural materials.

The first lunar outposts will utilise these technologies for us to field test and improve these technologies.

That is a given. The first lunar outpost will rely on a power plant sent from Earth and it is likely to be a combination of a nuclear derived plant and solar cells. Still the first available opportunity will allow us to place solar cells on a peak of eternal light. Chances are that it will be a specially derived payload sent from earth that is either landed on the spot or transported there to be set up. We will then decide where our first permanent base will be and one of the main considerations is access to minerals and of course solar energy.

Regolith certainly for the first foot is very loose after that it is very compacted. There a lot of threads on just how we can move regolith and I frankly do not see it as a problem. We will need to process about 10 tons a year to get the oxygen we need out of Silicane but that will actually be 10 times as much processed silicon that we will need for increasing a solar power grid by a MW a year.

That is not really the case Robotics has advanced to the point where they are very available for us to aid work on the Moon. Actually it is at the stage where using telerobotics and the very short communication lag that we can put a lot of the construction and base development onto robotic hands all controlled from Earth.

All manufacturing on the Moon will be highly automated and supplying the resources these factories and extraction systems need will be the job of telerobotic systems. When it comes down to the deployment of manufactured solar panels robots similar to the Robonaut using human space tools will do the job.

The Commercial communication companies are currently desperate for a launcher that will put something in the eight tons range into orbit. This is to support the new developing mobile phone and internet market in the far east. This market relies on very powerful signals to make the phones and computers smaller and these satelites to deliver this desired power have to be large.

Currently the only launcher is the Ariane 5 that is open to these companies and has the desired launch capability. But if the Falcon 9 can fly then it will have the desired capability and as a commercial launcher SpaceX will have a lot of intrested parties.

Sandbags full of lunar regolith compacted material would easily do it.

Apparently they suffered about 10 G on there way down and though safe they are being treated and checked by medical authorities at the landing site.

Hi Larry,

In the great wall street crash of 1929 we learned very harshly some lessons. The first is that we have to protect banks. In the case of 1929 the crash collapsed banks and we had a wave of collateral damage. this was literally destroyed buisnesses that though struggling could have easily have survived. Many small buisnesses simply had one bank account and when that bank collapsed so did there savings. With no cash they could not pay for items or even wages so they went down themselves. Banks by there very nature are closely linked. If one goes then there is a real risk of others going with it too. In 1929 we learned that lesson. It was the total collapse of the banks that kept the crash going on and on and creating the great depression that through almost half of the USA's workforce out of jobs.

In 1987 we had a crash that was actually by nature more severe than the one of 1929 but we had learnt our lesson and kept the banks safe and the Markets knew the Banks where safe. The result was that in a matter of days the crash figures had recovered.

I know it is not fair to protect one element of buisness above others and to provide a get out of Jail free card but we really dont have a choice as it is the only way to protect the whole economy and by its nature ordinary people. I dont in any way like it but necessity it is.

There are two types of Banks, Savings and Investment. Bear Stearns is the latter and it is investment banks which are the ones that stump up the cash to pay for mortgages and for loans ie credit cards, car loans etc. It in turn gets the money to pay for that by borrowing from the safer savings banks.

The credit crunch caused by America's sub prime market worries and the fealing that the Dollar is so weak has made banks unwilling to lend money to each other and as a result Bear Stearns found itself without any cash to pay of outstanding loans even though it had good assets. If Bear Stearns had gone down it would have left a lot of other banks who had loaned it money in a bad position.

The US army have been developing Exo-Skeletons for use initially in there logistics.

US army develops robotic suits

They are needless to say a few years away from actual deployment as there are still issues over balance and power but this prototype does show the actual ability that an exo skeleton would give.

In the three video's attached to the post you will see the XOS Exoskeleton do a bit of weightlifting and then they had to soldier who was piloting try it without the suit. Needless to say the weight was picking the soldier up.

Still this technology will go out into the civilian side and of course would be an incredible bonus for any Mars explorer.

The major difference in missions to Venus and Mars is how hospitable the planet is and the journey there.

In the case of Venus not only can we not walk around the surface we are also actually heading towards the biggest radiation source that we know. It is doubtful if we can actually even get a crew to land there in the first place and if we have them in orbit they will be recieving high doses of radiation just to operate ROVs on the surface.

We have yet to develop anything like the technology to build a floating city on Venus and there is the question of just what need do we have for such. What will floating cities actually accomplish, what economic reason do we need for them.

But in a democracy it is weight of numbers that influence any vote and that top fraction of one percent may have a lot of the money and be able to influence politics much more than the average person but in the end it is that 95% that really have the power.

And any politician has to look after that 95% to keep himself elected. Social programmes do have a place in society it is these that make our civilisation it really only becomes a problem when you dont have an idea of where you want your limits.

Can anyone really argue that basic education, basic medical care and keeping those who cannot get work or are too old to work is wrong.