You are not logged in.
What they have been telling ESA and the British Interplanetary society was that they hoped all 18 mirrors would be made by 2009. The actual Mirrors are hexagonal in shape and are 1.3metres each. The total mirror size on the main mirror is 6.5metres in width made of berylium and with the scoring planned for the underside will be instead of 250kg will actually only way 21kg.
I think the reason for the wish to use an Arianne 5 is that the mission planners believe that they will not have the shuttle and the need for a large diameter in payload is best suited to an Ariane.
Errorist HARDLY
What might happen is it gets jammed in and forms a longer spit. But more likely is that it scrapes its way until it floats further out into the ocean.
It becomes a problem if it is able to float into the trafic lanes of shipping as it should be able to survive a lot of heating and melting.
There are a few simple things that can be done to actually start the process. All of which consist of using the planets actual resources to increase the dencity of the atmosphere. And these are all forms of manufacturing or by increasing the heat absorbed on the surface.
And any building a soletta array to focus more sunlight on Mars should not really be that difficult an endeavour
Another point was that the Huygens probe would have only 3 hours to collect all the data it could before it was severed from its ability to send anything back. After that Cassini would never get in contact again as it was over the horizon.
So should the scientists have designed a probe that sent a lot of information back or pictures and take it from me at the bottom of the titan well the signal from Huygens was about as powerful as a commen mobile phone. The scientists and the officials chose to get as much info of the makeup and what makes titan tick. Pictures which would take a lot of the carrier band where simply not a priority. They got enough to find out what they need to know the rest of the information is the basic information which will keep the scientists busy for years.
Huygens is not a publicity exercise but it really is one useful science probe. ESA will for those who need to know will be releasing a lot of information about SMART1 in february when it has started its science run across the Moon.
Have a good look at the pictures.
The first picture is a panoramic of the area the probe is to land. Did you see that mountain is that not clouds or fog over it. The first picture taken on the surface shows rounded rocks. Now those could have been done by wind but what is more likely is that it was by fluid and we may have landed in a dry river bed where flash floods occasionly but often occur. Only one paler rock is angular and that could well be water ice, no dont give up yet its far too early and if anything its more interesting than what we thought.
Other Data has been gained like the radar scanning as the probe went down showed what could well be heavily laden with liquid clouds. And the first instrument a probe detected some form of crust possibly sand or clay soils or possibly ice covered snow as Huygens landed. We expected that Titan would be a world that could be like what Earth was like before life really started, We may have found a world where the basics of life HAS started. Frankly its far too early but a lot more exciting than planned.
Yeah but we can use techniques to ensure that our equipment does not fail.
At one time in the cold war the west was very worried that in the case of a nuclear war our weapons would all be destroyed but not the USSRs. The reason our advanced expensive weapons where based on the silicon chip and circuit board technologies and as such where at risk of EMP overload. The poor warsaw pact countries though still used valve technology as the mainstay of its electrics in its weapons. Valve technology is naturally a lot more resistant to radiation overload then integrated circuits.
And there is nothing to stop us having a lot more effective means to protect us from the effects of a storm surge from the sun and if it saves weight its worth it.
This is probably the wrong bit for this but recently read that "The problem with it being so cold on Mars is its so cold on Mars".
Mars has the capacity to be warmed by mankind and to actually do all the wrong things we are doing here on Earth to actually improve a planet. We could do easily feasible things to Mars which will increase its tempature and with that get an increased atmosphere. This is the go forth and multiply bit.
Mars has no where like the potential in resources as do the asteroids but it does have the capacity to be changed to become a lot better for life. And since we consider the Asteroids to be floating resources then when we go after them it will become a lot easier to be resupplied with essentials like food from Mars/or the Moon than anywhere else. Where would you like to bring up a family someplace like a collection of space junk like the ISS or a real world less gravity of course but somewhere you can walk on.
Its back
It is interesting how so often science fiction and real life space science advances tend to mirror each other. Just remembering a dodgy 70s TV series called space1999 that had the same means of protection.
Still it appears from the sketches that the plan for use of these Electrostatic balls where for the use of a very junior initial base. Frankly no base until it has a lot more power capacity could hope to have full electromagnetic protection and partial electromagnetic protection is worse than none at all. So for any initial base it looks like sandbags of regolith or the shelters being place in trenches carved out by a telerobotic digger and simply infilled. Still there use on long duration flights where the risk of being caught in a solar storm is high is a good development. It means that as long as the storm is going we could use the shield and when finished power it down. It may not be necassary for a storm shelter to be developed for these flights if the shield is effective enough so saving a small mass and space saving as long as the system is not too heavy.
One other point is that the shield is really designed to stop the dangerous elements from the sun and really only have to operate when the sun is shineing so the power for them could be got from solar cells. But it would be a heavy energy burden that an initial base could not afford.
To make it a National goal to have bases on the Moon and an increased space capacity is a great idea. As long as it is not a Kennedy type goal which though a success did not allow for anything further than just getting there and looking.
The next time we go to the Moon it is with the desire to actually stay and to use what we have there to improve our capacity in space and possibly our enviroment here.
If we can develop processes and equipment that suit both the Moon, Mars and possibly the Asteroids then all the better. And there is one other advantage to going to the Moon it will give us something immaterial but definitely worthwhile...Confidence.
What is the essay about?
What planet are you on anyway?
George Bush say's that he will get those terrorist that attack us on 9/11.
So George Bush invades two countries that had nothing to do with the 9/11 terrorist attack.
Afghanistan was the central place for training of Islamic terrorists it was the hotbed of everything antiwestern for many years. Attacking and destroying the Taliban who actively trained, supported Al Qaeda was a right decision. I do though reserve judgement on Iraq. But Afghanistan was a reasonable and effective strike against the Alqaeda and its ilk, not to mention a chance for that country to be rebuilt.
George Bush on the air craft carrier Abraham Lincoln say's the wars over.
Not that good a saying true but the Saddam regime had just been effectively toppled. Its the civilian war which followed that is so bad.
A year we are losing more service men and women than we did on our invasion of Iraq. We now have lost over thousand men after George Bush said the war was over. Not only that, but we are actually losing the war in Iraq also.
The situation in Iraq is a mess, this was never like the war in Europe where in 1945 the Americans where treated like liberators. This is a police action where an armoured division designed to simply shunt aside anything the Eastern Block could have sent against us is well truly unequiped. It has to be understood that a significant minority really hate the west. We think of a crusade as a righteous war and the people of the middle east call the war a crusade. But what they mean is a war they get stamped on their religion which unlike most western secular states is of singular importance, gets stamped on. And they feel weak and inefectual and well stamped on.
We went into this war with a really brilliant plan to destroy Saddam. It worked. But im not so sure that the plan to deal with Iraq afterwards really was that good. We really had two choices smash Saddam and his party then just leave. Or if we are to stay for a longer hall we should have really tried to get the hearts and minds and known that helicopter patrols above are rather useless when we could not tell friend from neutral from enemy. If we shot a neutral it was going to end up on the news in big letters, if we shot a whole wedding party then we where really S*****d. Our best resource then was a soldier, a basic soldier, acting and patroling showing the people a human face. And also not wearing sunglasses and looking like an imperial stormtrooper. We would have still taken casualties and heavy ones but as more and more people came to our way and our intelligence come police got better then we would have a stable country. Im not sure if we have that now but it is also not a complete loss yet.
Of course this is just my opinion.
I hardly hate oil, But until I see real proof it is only a rather dodgy theory.
Until then it is a very inplausible situation and one that we cant base our entire civilisation on. If we run out of cheap oil then we will be in real trouble unless another source of energy is found.
And if there are such sources of deep oil then why dont the petrochemical companies look for them and get a massive increase in there share prices. Geologists dont believe these ideas the companies dont believe them and certainly neither do the goverments.
What is more likely a lower strata of fractured rock with another older oil deposit or incredibly manufactured oil endlessly resupplying itself. Remember the Strat of this whole region is very broken up, something to do with a large rock having hit at the end of the jurassic?
It is almost certain that the oil wells in Mexico are simply being refilled from smaller oil deposits in the strat around and when these empty then so will stop the refilling process.
That is a pretty bold assumption to make without much evidence, would that be because you want to see oil go away? Read this:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ART … E_ID=38645
I think the evidence is fairly compelling that you are wrong in your assumption...
Anyway if not, many bulk polymer substitutes could be produced from corn and other plants instead of inert hydrocarbons if it came to it, but at present there is no substitute for hydrocarbons for air travel or engineering polymers, and hydrogen fuel cells are no match for hydrocarbons for power/weight ratio... portable tools, turbine engines, and so on. Perhaps trains too...
Edit: Somthing that aproximates diesel oil can be made from biological sources, but I don't know how good a replacement it is.
Sorry GCN but if you read that article it simply states that the Oil that is refilling that one field is coming from a source unknown and could easily be a deeper field that we dont know about and this is actually said in the article.
Mexico peaked in its oil production in 1921 and though modern techniques are in play and deep water sources of oil are now being developed we have never caught up to the amount pumped in that year. Still Mexico remains the seventh biggest oil producer in the western hemisphere. And maintains a potential of about 1.6 billion barrels.
The oil that is pumped in Mexico is mostly the result of Jurassic shales and at the depth we are drilling to get we find that the rock strata is very broken.
You can't beam energy from Earth/Moon to Mars, its simply too far. The microwave transmission beam would spread so much, that the energy would be essentially zero. It is impractical enough to try and transmit energy from the Moon to Earth across 240,000mi.
Then there is that issue that your solar cells on the Moon would be useless for about two weeks straight unless they were sited at the limited terrain near the poles. Mars is even behind the Sun for some days of the year.
Investing in advanced nuclear fission concepts is probobly a better idea. If you want to do space solar power though, the place to do it would be high Earth orbit: close enough to limit beam spreading, little need to compensate for the Earth's rotation, and short eclipse periods.
Oil will always be available, there are vast quantities and reserves here and there, it just won't always be cheap like today. The reason these reserves aren't be tapped is because oil from elsewhere is so cheap and drilling wouldn't be profitable... yet. Also some of the oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico are refilling themselves, perhaps though an entirely inorganic geological process.
Simply making sure your solar panels are around the Moon should ensure constant power except for the occasional eclipse. But I doubt we will ever use the Moon as a single big powerplant not when it appears we are so close to Fusion being able to work.
Sure oil will allways be available just not for the rather wasteful use of consuming it for fuel. It is too important for a lot of other purposes like making plastics. We can though allways use artificially create hydrocarbons, just expect prices for items made of plastic or have plastics in them to skyrocket.
It is almost certain that the oil wells in Mexico are simply being refilled from smaller oil deposits in the strat around and when these empty then so will stop the refilling process.
Indochina was a French colony not British the British where in Indochina in 1945 for a matter of a few months but only after forcing the Japanese out. Britains only real interest like all western countries was the rubber that was produced there.
Britain did try to get peace talks during the Vietnam war going but....
Could it be only a matter of time before an Islamic Holy Warrior decides to take out one of the Infidel's helicopters?
Lol the Indians already had this problem. They had been worried that some of the indigenous peoples who live on the islands in the Indian ocean could have been wiped out and as these peoples are still in the stone age they took a helicopter to look.
What they got was a lot of flint tipped arrows and spears coming there way.
Incidentally it should be noted that the Indian goverment will not give aid or allow it to these peoples. If the goverment or aid agencies was to aid them it would likely destroy there cultures so in fact wiping out what was left. Nasty situation to be in but there is no other choice.
Gravity shouldn't be a huge concern with plants either, they will just grow taller. What about lower gravity could possible cause them trouble? Just give them more vertical growing space then they need on Earth.
And we already create grain etc that are smaller stalks and more grain. It really just means we take our time to ensure we take a few strains of a plant that would provide the most nutrients for the least growing time and with the expectation that we will probably find varieties most suited to the task.
This is really something we can start down here now under artificial conditions to see what can be done. And the reduced gravity of both Mars and the Moon means that one species that thrives well in one location will probably work well in the other.
Especially as we will have to provide artificial illumination on both the Moon and Mars. The Moon as it has a 14 day then night cycle. Mars as it so far away not enough light is likely available for plants to grow without some support.
Seven more American soldiers were KILLED yesterday in Iraq.
Seven more lives thrown away for absolutely nothing.
Seven more American lives. I consider myself to be a very loyal American. I am disturbed to hear about American's dying day after day while there is nothing I can do about it. Sometimes I want to pick up a weapon and go but I'm getting too old for all that.
My opinion wavers from knowing this fight is necessary to "F*** them, let's just get the hell out and leave them to the insurgents!" Some day there will be peace in the middle east, I am absolutely sure of it. I just don't know how many lives it will take or how long.
I always come back to this thought- The American civil war cost 620,000 American lives. But it was worth it to set men free.
The American invasion of Iraq is not the American Civil War. The American civil war was an attempt to tear the American Republic apart by the British and there Southern sympathizers. So to preserve United States as a Nation and as a Republic, yes it needed to be fought. But, this Iraq war does not and should not have been started by the United State and the United States has no business being over in Iraq. This is an Imperial War of conquest and not a war of liberation unless you consider killing people as liberating people from living that is. Matter of fact the only war that the United States should have fought in the Twentieth Century was World War II and even that war would not have had to been fought if Prescott Bush and his cronies would not have finance Adolph Hitler rise to power. As to World War I, the United States should have stay out of that war. All we did was to salvage the British rotten beans of defending there Empire vs letting the world develop into nation states.
Larry,
Errrr what novel have you been reading?
The American Civil war was a fight between the South who believed in a States right to control its own affairs and the Norths belief in a federal system being paramount. Add in the differences over slavery, a lot to do with money, add in immigration paterns. And who got to control all the land to the west and you have an unholy mix of friction.
The United States entered the first world war as a result of the killing of a lot of civilians in the Lusitania incident where a german U boat torpedoed a luxury liner. The drawings of women and children drowning in the cold sea in all newspapers caused a real wave of anger. The WW1 equivalent of 9/11.
P.S.: I saw on a TV program last evening that the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln creates extra water from some internal process, which can generate something like 800 gallons of fresh, drinkable water per hour. I didn't jot down the facts, but anyway -- it's a conjoined group of spigots attached to the deck. Turn the handle and out comes fresh water. :up: They're constantly tapping that resource and flying the H20 via the 'copters to needy villagers, etc. Does anyone know how that process might work? ??? The reporter didn't go into detail (time constraints).
Hi Cindy
The USS Abraham Lincoln is a Nimitz class aircraft carrier it creates drinkable water by distilling the sea water. Its power is supplied by the Nuclear reactor aboard.
The Nimitz class actually can distill about 500,00 litres of water a day but it needs a lot to supply to the large crew aboard.
actually if anyone remembers the Sea Dragon thread we had it was planned to use a Nuclear aircraft carrier to crack the sea water to provide the Hydrogen and oxygen to fill the Sea Dragons tanks.
But more importantly is that a lot of aid is going to these areas I only hope that a reasonable amount of law and order can be imposed as these places where simply in rebellion before the Tsunami.
Frankly we dont have the capability to produce a single stage spaceplane that could put any meaningful cargo or passenger load to space. Thats why we use staging so as to increase the capacity of the cargo into orbit.
We will use jet engines with possibly LOX and/or water injection to get higher and faster. But we will use jets to take off as they are compared to the Isp of a rocket a lot more efficient and easier to run. We can allways have a rocket aboard the lower stage to give a jump to mach 5 - 7 to allow the upper and space capable stage to use pure rocket engines to get into orbit.
SSTO spaceplanes are not simple to build if they where why do we still use rockets. I will tell you why, we need to get to space with a meaningful cargo. We do not have an engine or a plane light enough and strong enough to go from standstill to space and back again with anything like a cargo. Only now have we started examining engines that may lead us to doing this but they are very very young equivalent to pre World war 1 prop planes.
So we are stuck with using stages so to increase the cargo to space even then they will only carry about 5 tons of cargo to LEO or passengers. We will still need rockets to put heavier items up or to higher altitudes. But you will ask why we should go ahead with spaceplanes then.
A spaceplane based on two completely reusable stages will be a lot more cost effective to operate. The lower stage could feasibly be refueled and turned around in a matter of hours the upper stage would need its heat shield well checked before reuse. But this leads to a lot less cost to get the same amount of people to orbit as the shuttle did. And a lot more operations done increasing access to space and reducing the bills.
Back to the question of minerals on Mars. Here's a very nice set of web pages about the formation of gold, nickel, copper, lead, zinc, and diamonds:
http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/min … /gold.html
That's the link to the gold page; at the bottom of it are links to the others. The short summary: these minerals (except diamonds,and including nickel) form from hot water escaping from a magma body (which CAN be basalt),flowing through the surrounding country rock, and precipitating the ores when the temperature and other conditions reach the right level.
The article says nothing about meteoritic sources of nickel, attributing the deposits to hydrothermal leaching of the elements from magma and deposition in the country rock.
The moon's too dry for hydrothermal process to work, except very rarely. Ore bodies on Mars will form at a depth of at least several hundred meters, so erosion (floods) or impact exposure will be necessary to expose them for exploitation.
-- RobS
What the article does not mention is that it appears that bacteria absorb the minerals from the water and then die causing the deposit. This apart from meteor impacts is one of the greatest forms of mineral deposition and vein forming.
If we find life on Mars then there may well be such deposits. But it will only be of use on Mars as it would cost too much to return to Earth to make it worthwhile.
If possible we should avoid the use of hydrogen as it really needs good storage and causes cryogenic problems. If we can get away with using Kerosene that would be better. Obviously the isp will be much reduced but the ease in handling and storage should increse flight rate capacity.
Of course another option is hydrogen peroxide/kerosene mix this with an improved isp of 271 should allow the required thrust with a decent safety level and quick refueling of the lower stages.
Still it is the upper stage that the problem occurs as we can get a much increased flight rate but still need to have an upper stage that can survive safely constant reuse. More to the point im thinking of a safely reusable heat shield.
There is a better and easier way I think of getting into orbit MR, and that is to use regular jet engines and bring along a supply of liquid oxygen and perhaps a kerosene rocket on the lower stage. If you inject LOX into the jet engines, they will get you up to Mach 5 and operate at a higher altitude, perhaps all the way to U-2 like heights. Carry along a rocket for a short burn if needed otherwise. The upper stage then won't need aerospike engines, and with slushed Hydrogen fuel can be built to handle more of the work in getting to orbit then regular liquid hydrogen.
There are no jet engines in production that are capable of getting a lower stage to the speed of mach 7. It could be possible to adapt a jet engine to do this maybe by injecting LOX into the engine stream but more likely by use of water to be injected instead to cool the air as it hits the engine so allowing greater compression.
But fundamentally it will be easier to have a rocket on the plane to push a lower stage high enough and fast enough to allow the seperation of the smaller and space capable upper stage which can ignite its pure rocket engine to enter space and be able to return. Seperation was allways the most dodgiest part of using two stage space planes and Saanger had real problems with it. But if you go high enough and air pressure is severely reduced then you get a lot easier seperation.
The Lunar prospector did detect the probable prescence of Hydrogen in the permanently dark areas of the lunar poles. Its last act was to kamikase one of the dark areas to see if we could detect the erupting water from the crash. This did not happen which proves - NOTHING.
Many basic reasons either way as to what happened. The prospector may simply have gone straight into a previous impact area, so no water there anyway. Or it may be that there is none. But the only way to find out for sure is a rover driving into these dark areas.
There is a lot to learn from the Moon and a lot to gain too but it needs a long term planned approach. And if we are going to be there anyway it makes sense that we practice what will give us a better chance of a permanent habitation of Mars and or Space.
There are many similarities in things that are needed to get either the Moon, Mars or the Asteroids done. These will all have to be worked out and an advancement in one will benefit all. A starter is a rocket that can actually put enough mass in space to allow us to make a start.