You are not logged in.
Well im from the the UK and it has to be mentioned that it is AN OPINION. I honestly believe everybody has the right to an opinion and that they must respect others opinion. But I must also mention that this article appears to come from people who where bitterly opposed to the war and that this in a similar statement was used as propaganda against the war.
The war has bitterly divided British public opinion at one stage most people where for what they thought was the right thing to do. But since then with no WMDs found and the continued casualties to British soldiers this has eroded and has almost come to the point of toppling the current british goverment.
It is a little bit Ironic that the current labour goverment is staunchly pro-european and is determined to have Britain join the Euro. If the only reason for the war was to keep the dollar top dog I can truly say they would not have supported the war at all. The gaurdian is also a paper that is not a supporter of the current goverment and there have been numerous spats.
I hope this has been helpful.
I think it is a conspiracy that fusion is so underfunded.
Most goverments tax petrol when it comes into there country and then tax it when it is sold at the forecourts. It may be that the tax on fuel is the single largest tax any country gets short of income tax's
Along comes a potential power source that would free us from the need to use consumables! Do you see any country backing something that would cut there tax base?
It may be the desire to reduce our dependance on oil from the gulf states that means fusion is back on the agenda.
Though another point is what happens to these gulf states when the oil is gone or simply not needed any more. Bahrain is going hell for leather to become a tourist destination building super hotels and sports events to attract tourists.(it has seriously reduced oil reserves and is using them in my mind wisely). But what of Saudi and Kuwait who rely completely on oil as there main source of capital. Well it will not be a nice experience for them.
From an economic and colonisation point both Mars and the Earth will need elevators it is the only reasonable way to keep costs down. With technology that we can envision for the future. Short of antigravity being developed we will be stuck with beanpoles.
Course with technology we have now we can start, but just not as cheap.
Quote Deagleninja Aug 07 2004, 15:20
But what does the Moon really offer us? Real-time telerobotics? Ok, and how does this prepare us for landing Humans on Mars where real time has no meaning due to the speed-of-light?
Best way to answer this is. What the problem with Humans building anything is that to make things happen they require a lot of logistics. These logistics cost a lot to send from the only source we have the Earth. What telerobotics give us is the ability to control from Earth machines that will build what we need for man so that when we send our people there they can walk into premade bases ready for them. This will drastically reduce our costs in the long run and more importantly give us more resources available for use in space. Telerobotics will also have a major use on the face of Mars as well as we can use this same technigues to send a second generation of brighter robots with human overseership capability to make bases and resources available for the Human colonists on Mars. And there is a time lag between the Moon and Earth its about 3 seconds each way.
One thing that the Moon has which Mars does not have is energy it has a lot more solar energy arrive than the same on Mars. There are spots on both poles that will allow almost continous power to be generated by solar panels. When we get a chance we will circumvent the Moon so as to have almost a continous power supply coming in. (we may well be able to use superconducting materials as in the Shade on the Moon being so cold and this will give a real increase in power collection). Energy is what makes modern civilisation without it we would be living in caves and with abundance it gives the Moon an edge when it comes to Industrial concerns.
I can almost certainly garuantee that the Zubrin Mars direct or Nasa Semi direct will without there being a continued increasing prescence on the Moon turn into an Appollo type situation where the there would be a few visits to Mars but when the public got bored they would cancel the program. They will even say it was NOT a flag and footprints mission as they had done so much research when there.
The only way that this can be stopped is if there is a drive to Colonize Mars and that takes more infrastructure than the Earth could realistically do. (We are talking large cycler type spacecraft) if we wish to send a decent amount of people to Mars. TeleRobotics will build us these behamoths in space and to get the materials from the Moon and Asteroids that will allow us to make the components and supplies to launch them.
This is why the Moon is important and why Telerobotics are an essential advance that we need to do to be able to really become a spacefairing race.
Mr Bush's father did not expect the collossall disaster that was the 90 day plan. It has seriously damaged the lunar and Mars advocates ever since.
Why should we go to the Moon, the best reply is its close.
On the Moon we can try out real time tele-robotics that can allow us to create a real Industrial base to allow colonisation of the rest of the solar system. Zubrins plan lends itself to Flag and Footprints missions ie once the mission is finished they go home. We in the Mars society want more than that we want colonisation. It is a harsh word I grant you but in the end it is a true word. Why go out and explore if not to develop new places for the species to live.
So this is one reason the space Advocacy groups joined to give there backing to the bush plan. We all may be singing from different hymn sheets but our aims are so similar we can agree and the tune will be the same.
Some of the worst wars in history where over the acquisition of land by one side or another. But then land meant power.
Still if some highly rare and essential product is discovered that requires a certain mineral found off planet that could cause tensions. This has happened already on Earth with oil.
And yes I agree that the ignoring of restrictions does start wars. Hitler ignored the Versailles armistice restrictions and the British and French and US ignored this instead they tried appeasement with really bad results. It is now the turn of the US to ignore treaty restrictions mainly as it has no equal and can do what it wishes. But if the big boys ignore the rules dont expect anyone else to and little boys grow.
Frankly my first thought was that with volcanism still present the equivalent of Martian hydro-thermic vents could be found, if there is enough heat and liquid water..A Yellowstone on mars almost just no geysers
My second thought oh wow easy to reach hot thermals good hydro power source make martian base easier.
In the case for the united Kingdom it is in Esa but seems to be waiting for something significant to happen and is quite happy to use either Nasa or Esa to launch the few probes it does do ie Beagle 2 Esa probe, Beagle 3 possible Nasa.
It is strange as the original Ariane rocket was developed using technology from the UKs independent rocket programe, (it actually launched one satelite called Prospero)
It seems to be a case again of Britain being unsure of its place wether to stay in europe and the French dominated Esa or to get closer to the US and Nasa.
The United Kingdom is significantly involved in one programme that of space guard the hunt for dangerous Asteroids/Comets and basic research using satelites.
We will farm on Mars and probably more than the people on the planet need for one decent reason
The food so grown will be sent to the Asteroids to the miners there who are sending there minerals and volatiles to Earth orbit, Who is sending settlers and advanced equipment to Mars.
This is called circular trade like all really good trade routes
And mars at one time was very volcanic (see the shield type volcanoes) it would be possible to find thermal vents these would have power and water sources for us
It is really interesting that the russian flights where so cheap.
But the Usa will not allow Nasa mission to fly on these, Esa though is different as it has built a pad for the launch of russian rockets. This may give them an edge.
In a country the immigrants over time will have there culture blended with others to form a new form of that culture.
The Usa and Canada are examples of countries benefitting from diverse sources of cultures which are blending, Mexico is not. The majority of that culture are from one country and the previous culture was annihalated by the newer one.
The people who move to the new country are usually going there as they want to and this leads to a willingness to "get on with it". And the difficulty that all have to face on the frontier leads will force cooperation and a feeling of identity
The cold war.
Stupid name it was a war but it got very hot sometimes.
With both factions able to incinerate each other it became MAD to face each other square on. So they fought using small countries as proxies and in showing how successful they where.
This i forsee happening in space as we fight to show how successful we are and the most territority we have. We also will ignore the restrictions on space weapons and using troops on the Moon and Mars so killing the outer space treaty. And the US has already stated its intention to use space weapons so negating one of the main tenets in another treaty.
Quote Smurf975 Aug 03 2004, 17:19
But still this isnt all. like on Earth the culture that dominates is not really the richest(else the Saudis and Kuwaitis would) but those that in some way appeal to to allotof different peoples and are advanced and have the best schools and personal technologies and freedoms
Using the Saudis as an example they are not the richest there upper class is but the majority of the population are poor and undereducated. It is for this reason and the lack of trust the Saudis upper class have for there own citizens that they employ so many foreigners to do the jobs they need. This means the Saudis are consumers just not producers and everything that they need is purchased and when the oil runs out.
A succesful society must be a general society and is capable of reacting to new enviroments allowing advantage to be taken. Also the society must be of a sufficient size to allow enough trained population to allow it to be a success. And it must stay the course. Holland did have colonies in the Americas and also in Africa and a lot in Asia, but with trouble at home and with a political union with Britain it decided to do away with its smaller American colonies, giving them to Britain.
Well yes with Russia and Esa being very friendly it sort of begs the question who is leading the space race Esa/Russia or the US. Frankly im not sure
Yes it is ours to lose so we should be moving now before lose more ground.
We can use the Napoleon selling the Lousiana territory as an example of what seems to be happening now.
Napoleon sold lousiana as he was concentrating on France and Europe and did not have the vision to see what is possible and he needed the money.It was too far away and he had no use for it now. This sort of is like what is happening now the moon and mars are there but no one has the vision or the willingness to spend the required cash.
As soon as one nation begins to create bases and colonies it will result in a race by other nations and groups to join in.
The citizens of Mars will be living in Domes and bases yes, there is a little that can be done to make it easier for them.
The domes will be large open spaces with a lot of Earth type plants and maybe clear sides to the dome tents so the martian views can be seen. Other psychological effects will be done different coloured bricks, Mosaics, High towers with stunning views and of course tours and outside trips. It may be a law for people to have a time they must work in the farms!
Of course the best thing will be to terraform Mars or even partial terraform so that large spacesuits will not be needed.
And for the Total recall crowd think of all the mines and research stations it will be impossible to "keep" people under a 100% control actually it will hurt the development of mars we want colonists and adventurers NOT slave labour
What do you propose to do to reduce dust contamination inside a hab, martian fine dust would prove to be a major health hazard and as it will likely be charged very sticky on the suits. You could i supposr run a charge in your balloons but they will need regular cleaning to fix
It does sound like the plot of a real bad Un takes over the world type novel.
Funny thing is we might make bigger ships than that Battlestar after the initial exploration. If we want to have colonisation we will need something bigger to carry colonists. It would be a bit ironic if in the future our children look at that moronic thing and say "God thats tiny they wanted to go to mars in THAT"
Apart from the X38 what American company has built any functioning spacecraft designs since the shuttle and the 1980s. There have been test beds and a lot of interesting designs but no real change in spacecraft since the shuttle appeared and beacame the great financial sponge it is.
The ISS does not count as it being a space station from an engineering point of view should be a lot simpler to build as it does not need aerodynamics and large engines etc.
So for over 25 years there have been no American scientists building and refining new space crafts, this is a wasted generation of talent.
We could have made an ISS that worked but to save costs we didnt, We made it a makework for the shuttle. It is not too late but really it would be hard to turn it to doing something useful. The ISS was supposed to be the spaceport for further exploration but all that would have made this has been cut.
I like it lets build one
A basic shuttle C would have the same external tank and SRBs as the shuttle does today with the fixes being imposed at the moment.
But as the shuttle component will not be coming back and the shuttle C is not to be a man carrier it will not need all the expensive and heavy parts that come with that. Also the attitude thrusters and main engine do not need to be reusable so major weight savings there too.
The lack of major wings also increase the cargo capacity again and no heat shield or heavy wall support for reentering atmosphere.
And as for guidance computers it will be brand new more modern ones.
This all leads to a lot more cargo carrying less cost to taxpayer vehicle. Shuttle C could be the vehicle that leads man back to the moon and mars as it will allow us to put a lot of infrastructure into space a lot faster and cheaper than we do now. Frankly the ISS would have been childs play to launch if we had shuttle C do it.
Inside a railgun as proposed is 4 magnetic rail loops, the shot is carried in a cradle which is powered by these rails. But as the cradle speeds up it causes a form of supersonic bow wave (shockwave)
This causes the magnetic rails to get pushed away from the cradle and to be damaged. Needless to say the best magnets are superconducting versions and require to be kept very cold, these have proven to be very prone to damage when fired as heating is also inflicted on them.
The damage done to the rails assuming if it does not stop the shot will cause inacuracy and considering the plan is to have Supergun ranges with these weapons this has to be sorted. Some munitions fired have been fitted with guidance type fins which with a small inbuilt gps system allows themselves to guide onto the target.
Tape the offenders noise pollution.
Play the noise back to the offender the next night as he tries to get to sleep
http://www.orbitalrecovery.com/]Orbital Recovery
Interesting company they will be launching there space tug concepts in 2007. Seems they launch as spare weight on Arianne 5s.
So the first space tugs going up, oh paid for by ESA
Will these have the capacity to push ISS components close enough for grabbing by the canadarm?