New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

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.
  1. Index
  2. » Search
  3. » Posts by Grypd

#201 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 1 & Falcon 9 » 2007-03-20 19:27:29

And its away the falcon flew. First stage seperation and second stage appear to be working fine. Lost the podcast at that time pity due to the server being too busy.

Looks as if there is a completely private space launching company in existence at last.  tongue

Edit  sad

Telemetery has apparently been lost 5 minutes into the flight.

#202 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 1 & Falcon 9 » 2007-03-20 18:09:19

Another scrub, this time though at point of launching the rocket. At least they where able to scrub the launch with the main engine firing.


Edit
There will be a new launchtime at 5:05 pacific time 01:05 gmt

#203 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 1 & Falcon 9 » 2007-03-20 11:29:52

SpaceX will try again at 12 midnight GMT or 4pm Californian time.

The problem was down to a communication glitch between computers and the problem reguired some reprogramming to sort and it is now fixed.

#204 Re: Human missions » The Cost of Going to Mars - A cost estimate of Colonization » 2007-03-20 06:30:23

There are many people who would love to have a go at the minerals in the sea. Ancient blck smokers long since dead are ridiculous when it comes to mineral content.

Heres a recent article about one mans hope from australia.

Race to the Bottom

Using telerobotic controlled mining craft it is easily doable and affordable.

#205 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 1 & Falcon 9 » 2007-03-19 18:12:32

So launch is scrubbed for today

pity was looking good.

#206 Re: Human missions » The Cost of Going to Mars - A cost estimate of Colonization » 2007-03-19 18:08:43

I would have to say that the reason that there is not affordable access to the oceans depths is simply down to there being no reason to do so. The law of the sea pretty much stops any property claims or even resource utilisation.

A bit like space then!!

#207 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 1 & Falcon 9 » 2007-03-19 18:04:09

well the launch is currently stopped at T-1:02

just enjoying the pod cast  8)

#208 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good or bad what has Bush done for America » 2007-03-17 19:20:36

Chlorine was used during world war I as a chemical weapons. One does not chlorinate swimming pools with a tank of compressed Chlorine gas.

What's the point of looking for WMDs if the liberals are going to make an excuse for everything found and give Saddam a pass on it. If its Plutionium, its for a commerical reactor, it is chlorine, its for the swimming pools, it its a potential nerve agent its to make fertilizer etc. And all these non-WMDs fall into terrorists hands and conveninetly use it as a weapon yet you say some GIs burned out lungs does not constitute proof of the existance of chemical weapons in Iraq.

Chlorine if pumped into a cylinder and then detonated is a very simple bomb to make and theres lots of explosives to be found in Iraq. One mistake the USA did make as Rumsfield stated himself was not to stop the looting of the armouries of the Iraqi army after the invasion. Then again most car bombs that explode over there as well as the components for these chlorine gas bombs have there basis in common ammonia based fertiliser. In this case it simply was Chlorine in its liquid form detonated and the heat of the explosion gassified some and the splashed Chlorine would also start outgassing in the blast area.

Nerve agents are not too difficult to make but you have to be out to make them and you can then be caught. There is also the problem that unlike chlorine for real effectiveness they have to be applied and that takes a bit of skill and means to do so. The average insurgent just does not have this. putting a tank in the back of a pickup and then blowing it up is a whole bunch of factors easier than using the really deadly stuff.

Tom no one is looking for Saddams WMDs anymore they are irrelevant now and even if there had been some they are well disapeared across the border into Jordan or Saudia Arabia by now. But will there be WMDs used in Iraq I dont know. The factions that are trying to create the strife and to cause the Civil war we all fear, so bringing in all the surrounding states on the side of the various factions would love to use WMDs on there opponents.

#209 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good or bad what has Bush done for America » 2007-03-17 12:36:14

Well it seems that weapons of mass destruction have finally been found:

BAGHDAD - Multiple suicide bombings struck the Sunni insurgent stronghold of Anbar province, and about 350 Iraqi civilians and six U.S. troops were treated for exposure to chlorine gas, the military said Saturday. At least two policemen also were killed in the attacks.

The violence started Friday afternoon when a driver detonated the explosives in a pickup truck northeast of Ramadi, wounding one U.S. service member and one Iraqi civilian, the military said in a statement.

That was followed by a similar explosion involving a dump truck south of Fallujah in Amiriyah that killed two policemen and left as many as 100 residents showing signs of chlorine exposure, with symptoms ranging from minor skin and lung irritations to vomiting, the military said.

Another suicide bomber detonated a dump truck containing a 200-gallon chlorine tank rigged with explosives Friday evening, also south of Fallujah in the Albu Issa tribal region, the military said. U.S. forces responded to the attack and found about 250 local civilians, including seven children, suffering from symptoms related to chlorine exposure, according to the statement.

Suicide car bombers have used chlorine against Iraqis in Anbar a total of five times since Jan. 28, it said.

And thus that justifies the invasion of Iraq. Don't believe me, then tall that to those soldiers who are suffering from chlorine gas exposure.

Tom, Chlorine was easily used by Al-Qaeda it is a very common substance and is used to treat water for bacterial growth. It is common in Iraq and all hot countries where you have to treat pools or water towers or even your own water tank. The insurgents simply blew up a bomb next to a drum of chlorine which can be found for sale in any handy hardware store to do this effect. It is not a WMD that is reserved for the use of nerve agents and similar.

#210 Re: Life on Mars » Cave Entrances found on Mars » 2007-03-17 12:29:13

'Cave entrances' spotted on Mars

Scientists studying pictures from Nasa's Odyssey spacecraft have spotted what they think may be seven caves on the surface of Mars.
The candidate caves are on the flanks of the Arsia Mons volcano and are of sufficient depth their floors mostly cannot be seen through the opening.

That is some size and it could easily be a place where primitive martian life could escape from the IR of the sun.

#211 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good or bad what has Bush done for America » 2007-03-15 18:12:06

Jimmy Carter tried that one, direct conflict was always the last resort with him, the very very last resort, and Jimmy Carter always found that he can always talk some more, negotiate some more, he stayed up late nights trying to negotiate the release of the hostages, and an inordinate amount of his time was used up trying to negotiate with the Revolutionary "Republic" of Iran with very little progress, he figured the choice was that or lose the 44 hostages and declare war on Iran, but he chose to talk and talk, conucted a token rescue mission that was a failure and talked some more. He made clear that if Iran executed any hostages, there would be consequences, Iran didn't, but it didn't release any either, and so Jimmy Carter just talked and talked, and never used force against Iran, mostly because the Reporters put the pictures of the hostages up on the TV, so Jimmy couldn't sacrifice them by giving the Iranians a deadline and if not met, declare war on them. If you always leave force as a last resort, you may never resort to it, even if you should, because one can always talk uselessly some more.

So Clark, do you want another Jimmy Carter? Jimmy Carter didn't seem too popular in this country, they weren't satisfied with his late nights of trying to release the hostages, and his sweaters, and his turning down the White House Thermostats, and his inflation and gas rationing. Well the American people got tired of him and didn't reelect him. Do you want to put another one like that in the White House? I'll tell you now, he's going to last one term and then he's out, 4 years wasted.

I did a study on Jimmy Carter. He was one of the most maligned presidents and cannot be blamed for the rise of Islamic Iran or the hostage crisis. He can be though acclaimed for helping to destroy the Soviet Union and destroying the cold war.

We will start with the Iran situation. Iran had real problems with the foreign backed Shah and there had been for decades a movement against him and the western powers (the west had already backed a coup against a nationalistic goverment). What really peeved the Iranians though was that when the Shah left the country as it boiled over he was being flown to the US on a US diplomatic jet. When the new leader of Iran, Khomeni called for demonstrations against these foreign powers the students actually planned to take over not only the US embassy but also the USSRs. But then over the airwaves from Turkey came Radio Turkeys belief that the USA would get another coup to put the Shah back in charge and later that week large crowds gathered outside the US embassy and eventually came over the walls. Of course the students had ment to take over (they had done it before) but they had the very vocal backing of most Iranians.

Many of the embassy staff got away and where able to be hidden in the Canadian and Swiss embassies. 66 though where captured and the demands of the hostage takers where for the return of the Shah for trial (and execution). A military operation called Eagle Claw was tried and it was an unqualified disaster. So the president started talks and days before Reagan took power the basis of the Algerian accords where signed and the treaty for the hostages to be freed was arranged. Reagan took the credit for what Carter arranged.

By the way in the only private session since the second world war the Canadian parliement took the unique decision to issue passports to all the hidden diplomatic staff so they could get out of Iran. They broke international law to help there ally.

How did Carter help to destroy the USSR. In 1979 afghanistan was invaded by the USSR. Carter blocked grain and fuel shipments to the USSR as a result but he also ordered the creation of Operation Cyclone. This is where the Afghan tribal leaders where armed and financed by the USA to fight the USSR creating what became the USSRs Vietnam. Unlike Reagan who benefitted from the links Carter put in only local afghans where so trained not till Reagan took over where all the foreign nationals determined to fight the Soviets armed and trained as well.

Incidentally this was a history project when written though it is a good example of the principle that even with so much power you just cant control events and that if you use military force it not necassarily will go the way you want. I only did this project since we where not allowed to do one on the more relevant to my peers Falklands war.

#212 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good or bad what has Bush done for America » 2007-03-13 12:17:33

Seems obvious doesn't it?

The money will come from Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact if we win the war in Iraq, Iraq will be better able to pay since it has the 2nd largest oil reserves in the Middle East, but Iraq will only be able to pay if we win the war there and don't cut and run.

If we cut and run, we'll be left holding the bill, since the insurgents we left there will be messing thing up for Iraq and preventing the flow of oil. If we want to be paid back for the Iraq War effort, we have to put Iraq back up on its feet so it can pay us. Isn't that obvious, or is there some flaw with that logic?

Obviously we need some change in tactic, and George Bush is trying, but the only tactic the Democrats will consider is cut and run, and that will leave us holding the bill and Iraq incapable of paying it.

Tom you are trillions in debt and Iraq will never pay you back. For every $10 you spend on Iraq the most you will ever get back is 10 cents. This is due to Iraq being an economic disaster zone everything has to be rebuilt and repaired and im not just talking about the Goverment. The Oil industry is rapidly getting up to speed but the rest of the countries infrastructure is a mess.

Afghanistan has but one major product and that is Heroin. So count that out.

#213 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » The sham called "global warming" » 2007-03-12 16:03:11

Fuel cells reguire a certain amount of platinum group metals and it is one of there most limiting factors both in making and cost.

Not to mention a lot of pollution reduction equipment relies again on Pgms so if we could find a source (especially since Pgms are getting harder and harder to find) and can get it back to Earth within a reasonable price then that is a financial reason to be in space and will lead to other better things.

#214 Re: Human missions » Human Missions and Public Support » 2007-03-12 15:46:11

Intrestingly there was an article in todays space review about the publics lack of support for space.

Space and the end of the future

Amid the renewed interest in manned space missions to the Moon and beyond, there has been a great deal of talk about the American public’s interest in space—or more accurately, its lack of interest. In some quarters, the feeling even verges on hostility.

Still, it’s clear that in the days of the Apollo program, support for such initiatives was more widespread than it is today, and many plausible reasons why are now familiar talking points to those who follow the issue. One is disillusionment with a program that had for too long been organized around expensive stunts, especially after the ending of the Cold War that had once seemed to justify those stunts.

Says it as it is.  sad

#215 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » The sham called "global warming" » 2007-03-10 18:29:31

In some ways we can use the greenhouse scare to promote space and the use of materials found to improve life down here on the Earth. We have always needed a source of PGMs and this can only be found extraterrestial.

#216 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good or bad what has Bush done for America » 2007-03-10 18:26:21

The problem is that the US economy is suffering due to the weakness of the dollar and the high fiscal debt. That is why the economies growth has gone from 4.3% to 3.1% and now its a 2.2%. All that is happening with such a fiscal debt is that the US economy is slowing and at a high rate.

Weak and Strong are very loaded words but they have to have evidence and at the moment unfortunatly for me as a space advocate the US economy is weak. The US economy has to support other things than space flight and priorities have to be met. Iraq and Afghanistan are rightly priorities and so the money has to come from elsewhere. Vietnam did the same for the apollo programme so the Orion programme will get burned.

#217 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good or bad what has Bush done for America » 2007-03-10 15:03:41

The US Government is probably paying less interest on its debt than you are paying on your home. United States savings bonds are probably the safest investments around. US Debt is one of the levers the Fed uses to control the money supply, without US Debt, there'd be no Treasury bills for the Federal Reserve to buy, it would have to resort to picking companies and buying their debt

Intrest rates do not matter for much if the debt increases at about 2 billion each day and you are unable under the present fiscal structure to pay it off or worse stop the debt increasing. And in a mortgage the bank holds your house deeds does this mean that China as a major holder of US bonds can sell that country.

Our unemployment rate is 4.5%, how is it in Scotland? Raising taxes sure isn't going to accelerate growth, all that does is leave less money in private hands to invest. The economy is growing, if the government controls spending then that growth will eventually balance the budget all by itself. Part of the government's spending is servicing the debt, that means that with a balanced budget the debt will eventually be paid off.

Our unemployment rate is about the same but is reducing. Our economy is growing as well at a greater rate than the USA's. But it really is not possible to compare economies the USA is drastically a lot larger and we could be equated to a state rather than the whole USA. The problem is that part of the goverments finances are to service the debt but there is not enough money there to stop the debt increasing so though it slows its increase the increase still happens so more debt is accrued.

A good analogy is the CEO of a company, if the companies profitability isn't so good, a democrat with a similar philosophy would take out his calculator and say, "heres our problem, we sell 'x' amount of goods and multiply it by 'y's price and the total amount of sales minus cost is our revenue and its not high enough to generate enough revenue, so the solution is simple, we just raise our prices through the roof and we'll have plenty of profits. Say for example the product was 20 oz bottles of Coca Cola and they were being sold at 20 million bottles times $1.25 per bottle, all we have to do then is raise our price to $12.50 per bottle and multiply that by 20 million bottles sold and we'd tremendously increase the companie's revenue!" And of course the entire board being of like minded persuation all stand up and give the CEO a cheer for saving the company.

Then some smart Alec guy with glasses raises his hand, "Ah sir, how do we know the public is still going to buy 20 million bottles at that new price that you propose?"

The board, being of liberal pursuasion, simply tries to shout down the guy with glasses for spoiling their day, they'd rather live in their fantasy world where they can set their company's product price to whatever they want.

In buisness this is correct but goverments have different products all together. They are in short the equivalent of not for profit organisations. They have to provide core services but the non core and unfortunatly space flight is amongst that can and will be reduced to make the budget meet. My fear is that whoever takes over from Bush will introduce major spending cuts as the USA still has major wars to fight and men fighting for there lives are rightly going to have a higher priority than that of a new space launch system.

Likewise the Democrats can just assume that the US economy will star the same no matter to what level they raise their marginal taxes. If before it was 35% and they raise it to 70%, they just assume that they'll double their revenue because 70% is twice 35% it is simple math as far as they are concerned. Of course corporate investments go way down if their profits are taxed at 70% instead of 35%. New plants aren't build, and new technology isn't invested in, while countries like Japan and China soar way ahead of us. If we are going to use European Economic policy as our inspiration, then our economy will end up slow and moribound just like theirs. Meanwhile Japan's economy and China's has low tax rates and they aren't raising them. I took a degree in economics so I know what I'm talking about. The US government isn't a monopoly, and corporations do have a choice as to whether to pay its US taxes, in the long run they would simply move their operations overseas. Few people are going to want to invest in the US and pay its taxes if it just arbitrarily raises them to balance the budget as you propose.

All you are looking for is an argument against Bush and your goal is simply to replace him in 2008, it doesn't matter whether your economic solutions actually works in the real world economy. A corporation can either raise its prices or cut its expenses, cutting expenses usually workes better in boosting profitability than raising prices due to competition. The United States has compeditors too you know, and the tax rate is the price of goverment, so don't be so naive in assuming that all the rich people have no choice in paying whatever tax rate the Congress decides, because they do, they can vote with their feet and move to another country that doesn't tax them as much.

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans can control the worlds economy and the situation is that the dollar is weaker so though it is great for exports the problem is that purchasing fuel and materials needed to make those exports is a lot more expensive. And one of the major costs is wages and with fuel costs rising so do wage bills. This hurts peoples jobs as buisness has to cut to keep itself afloat and so more demands are placed on goverment. The dollar is weak because the US appears financially weak.

#218 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good or bad what has Bush done for America » 2007-03-10 05:49:25

Unless of course there has to be a whole raft of new taxes to pay this debt off and this will hurt them.

Taxes for everything, is that your motto? The Europeans have overtaxed themselves, this slows growth and makes less revenue available for the future. You raise revenue by growing the economy, not by taking more money away from the people! You manage the economy to increase growth. If you tax the rich people at 90%, they won't invest their profits productively, they'll send it to tax shelters instead, or they'll invest overseas where the taxes are lower, but all liberals can think of is raising taxes or cutting defense or space exploration.

When youre in debt you have to pay that debt off. The fact that the USA owes over a trillion $ hurts the US economy. The US goverment has to pay out just to service that debt and that reduces its ability to spend elsewhere. Normally it is not a problem when your economy grows but there is a global slowdown in trade and so the goverment gets less money in. This deficit also increases inflation and of course there is the problem that it increases the economies that you owe the debt too. In this case the single biggest holder of US goverment bonds is China.

An economy is a balance of taxes, spending and growth. The US economy is skewed and weak at the moment.

#219 Re: Human missions » Alt.space debacle (GCNRevenger 's gonna love this) » 2007-03-10 04:09:02

Again Jeff Bell is on his rant again but as always he spreads good points in with ignoring the points that hurt his arquement.

You will note that the rocketplanes are experimental test craft put to the limit of there then capability. The majority in the 1940s and 50s. These craft where instrumental in developing our understanding of flight and so they had a high risk.

But since then we have advanced our understanding of material, atmospheric and of course airframes a lot. Our planes no longer rely completely on the skill of the pilot they use computers and advanced fly by wire systems.

We have advanced wind tunnels and computer simulations designed to make it easier to simulate what a plane can do. And of course we also have 50 years of knowledge these aero engineers do not have and this is priceless.

Mr Bell does make some good points but his bitterness reduces his arquement and that is a pity.

#220 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good or bad what has Bush done for America » 2007-03-09 13:04:32

Unless of course there has to be a whole raft of new taxes to pay this debt off and this will hurt them.

#221 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 1 & Falcon 9 » 2007-03-09 07:02:19

They cannot afford another failure. And they are a small outfit.

#222 Re: Human missions » Energia's lunar plan » 2007-03-08 08:25:38

Death throes and grand delusions

A very well sourced article on why Energia is living in a dreamland but also of the situation of Russia's space industry.

#223 Re: Space Policy » Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view » 2007-03-08 08:23:29

And now we have Germany.

Germany Plans Mission To The Moon

Germany has announced plans to develop and launch a lunar mapping mission by 2013 and after this it is to develop a lander to explore and take samples back to the Earth.

#224 Re: Human missions » More Chinese space tech stuff » 2007-03-08 07:01:53

Spacedaily: Chinese Spacemen To Reach Moon In 15 Years

China has possessed the technical capacity to send spacemen to the moon in 15 years, a leading rocket expert said on Tuesday. Huang Chunping, the chief launch vehicle designer of the country's manned space flight program, told Xinhua that China is well capable to send manned spacecraft to the moon in 15 years given an adequate funding and punctual project launching.

Will they recieve adequate funding not likely when the Reported increase in the military budget was 17.8% (probabily closer to 30%). They have done well with what they have but they will need much heavier lift capability before they can send people to the Moon and that development will cost, nor can they get military funds as there is no military need for such heavy lift capability.

While admitting there is still gap between China's Long March launchers and the carrier rockets of the United States and Russia, Huang said the Long March series are "slightly" better than the European Space Agency's Ariane rockets.

There main competition for commercial launches and I actually doubt that a long march is as good as say an Arianne 5 ECA

#225 Re: Human missions » Shuttle STS-117 - Atlantis » 2007-03-04 07:34:42

After all the trouble they've had to protect the Space Shuttle from re-entry at 17,000 mph, you wouldn't think such a routine event as a hail-storm would do enough damage as to cause a return to the shed! Will the latest mod to the programme turn out now to be a tent-shelter over the whole sheebang?

But it is not the shuttle itself damaged but that of the very flimsy external tank and as it contains super cold hydrogen and oxygen it makes sense to ensure since it is dented that there is no eddy points inside these tanks.

  1. Index
  2. » Search
  3. » Posts by Grypd

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB