What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

Rxke · 2005-12-16 12:42:52

Doesn't fit in the picture. Subscriptions w/monthly fee is not what he's talking about. Otherwise his breakdown of the blocks would be 90% of 12 blocks/year...

Martin_Tristar · 2005-12-16 18:19:20

Rxke,

No, the figures are based on a monthly activity, not yearly. I am not going to explain anymore , If you can't work out the benefits with the space budget then your lost and I am not going to help you to understand anymore.

This also goes for GCNRevenger and Dook as well.

Rxke · 2005-12-17 03:41:51

Whatever, Rupert...
I can't read what you said, because I cose to 'ignore' you, but a lot of people have tried to get an explanation from you about how you will amass such a huge capital, and you've never answered. You may recall I once said if your plan were to become a reality, I'd be very enthousiastic, but you know, extraordinary claims, extraordinary proof...

So you give us no clue whatsoever, yet revert to saying we've got to open our minds, we're lacking basic skills etc.

I bet you'll get along very well with Mister ISA, have fun. Too bad his account here has been locked, but not to despair, he has his very own messageboard, where you probably will find like-minded souls.

Grypd · 2005-12-17 11:48:29

Apparently Richard Branson with his virgin galactic has managed to get 100 people to pay the full fee of $200,000 and has a further 38000 deposits. This just to get 15 minutes of freefall and astronaut wings.

I know this is not the thread for it but I wonder how we could access this obvious amount of money and see what would happen if we could increase the time spent in space in this case orbit.

If we can get this money will it be enough to pay for a private development of space.

GCNRevenger · 2005-12-17 11:51:43

No and no

First, this supply of rich adventurers isn't bottomless. We probobly won't be seeing alot of second-timers for a suborbital hop.

An orbital flight will, by simple virtue of the dynamics involved, be far and away more expensive, and hence a correspondingly smaller pool of thrill-seekers.

And that really isn't enough money for the private development of space, either, even if it did work.

Grypd · 2005-12-17 11:56:25

Still would be nice if we could :?

But yes I know there is a shortage of people willing to pay these prices but..

Oh for a cheaper launch reusable launch system

GCNRevenger · 2005-12-17 12:16:41

"Cheap RLV" is an oxymoron... getting into space is one of the greatest engineering challenges that man has ever faced, and building a machine that can do it over and over again without substantial cost or risk per-flight is harder still.

The way I see it, there are only three solutions...
-Build a giant version of DC-X, or discover a super fuel (eg cyclic ozone with Al-doped slush hydrogen). $10-15Bn minimum

-Build the X-30, with all the tricks and revolutionary new heat tollerant materials. $20-25Bn minimum.

-Build a space elevator, preferably on top of a multikilometer tower, but on an ocean platform if need be. $20Bn?

Pick one... none of them will be cheap.

...All this piddling with dropping overgrown Me-262s from Leer jets with stretched wings or trying to fish saltwater soaked and perhaps reentry-warped low density rocket stages out of the ocean is pitiful or the Kistler rocket are pretty pitiful.

Palomar · 2005-12-17 12:49:17

No and no
First, this supply of rich adventurers isn't bottomless. We probobly won't be seeing alot of second-timers for a suborbital hop.
An orbital flight will, by simple virtue of the dynamics involved, be far and away more expensive, and hence a correspondingly smaller pool of thrill-seekers.
And that really isn't enough money for the private development of space, either, even if it did work.

*Yeah, the rich kids' carnival ride is being set up in my backyard. They can do whatever they want with their money of course, and I think you're spot-on GCN.

Can we say fad?

Whatever. I'd just really like to see manned scientific exploration of Mars. And if we can't get NASA astronauts there any time soon, then I guess I'll look forward to Lunar expeditions.

And of course if I were in support of the privateers (Branson and others), their spaceports would thousands and thousands of miles from where I live.

Murphy's Law is the damnedest thing. Oh well, at least the Very Large Array is not too far away.

--Cindy

GCNRevenger · 2005-12-17 21:26:21

"the rich kids' carnival ride"

Ha! Perfect Cindy

Martin_Tristar · 2005-12-17 22:13:10

Rxke,

Well, I see you can't read and understand because the answer has been given twice before on this topic about how the money can be generated and the maths behind the answer. Before I can provide the rest of the answer we need to have the solution infrastructure completed.

Again I told you and the other before and again you don't listen. The government budgets are not bottomless for scientific research into space and the public will eventually call for a halt into space because they won't see any earth based benefits.

You need to make plans for all possibilities including those possibilities that effect the movement for exploration (prospecting) and colonization / settlement in space.

The other part of your comments regarding Rupert --- If you mean Rupert Murdoch, Chairman of News Limited then I would love his resources to help meet our goals for the development of space, If you are talking about your cousin Rupert, then you can have him, and the comments about ISA ---- what is that ? don't know and Its not a factor in our objectives ---- But what about the Rockfellers or other resource rich families and indivdiuals of the world, they could also provide their fortunes into the long term ventures for humanity. Bigalow is using his personal fortune to expand into space with bigalow aerospace. I think its time the space community really asks and markets to the global rich community about the long term benefits for humanity and the possible asset rich resources in space.

BWhite · 2005-12-17 22:34:33

...All this piddling with dropping overgrown Me-262s from Lear jets

Obviously, I'm bored.

Me-262 or maybe the Me-163?

I think you mean the Komet. But your point stands.

It is cool, however, that Pioneer Rocketplane will actually use a rebuilt Learjet to go suborbital. Add a delta wing and rockets and go ballistic.

Not even a steppingstone to orbital, however.

GCNRevenger · 2005-12-17 22:55:18

*skips over the Martian Tristar post entirely*

Heh yeah whichever Bill, the rocket powered one.

A Leer jet with a rocket? Well, it won't be good for much, but it might just put Burt and Wannabe Space Guy out of business. Only a modification of exsisting hardware, liquid fueled (no rubber rocket reloads), and more passengers. Scaled/Virgin Galactic are in trouble already.

Edit: About the only things that a jumbo SS1 has going for it is that its rocket can't explode and that the itty-bitty three seater has actually been tested (albeit not reliably). If Pioneer can build the thing, they'll put Virgin Galactic out of business.

SpaceNut · 2005-12-19 08:40:38

Here is the other side of the fad:
Who needs to eat when you can go to space?

I'm so giddy with excitement. I can hardly wait. But wait - and wait - I must. For years, eons really, it seems like. Until 2009, at the earliest, when, if everything goes right, I'll get to bob around absolutely weightless (yes!) in a spaceship high above Earth for about six minutes.
The whole thing will only cost me around $200,000, which I figure I can scrape together by selling off everything I own, except the pickup truck, which I'll have to live in after that.

But are there strings attached:

The cool thing is that the super-big bucks it will take to make New Mexico (and me!) space-worthy are coming from taxpayers.
That's the deal cooked up by Gov. Bill Richardson and British tycoon Richard Branson. The way it works is the state puts in $100 million, asks the feds to pony up another $90 million, and persuades voters in the regally rich counties of southern New Mexico to raise the gross receipts taxes they pay at their many restaurants, art galleries and spas.

But these are loans which must be paid back just to create how many new jobs for NM.

Then come the jobs - up to 3,500 of them, according to one prediction. And don't you know those well-paying jobs will go to New Mexicans? I mean, our universities are churning out aerospace engineers, but where are the jobs? I, for one, am tired of seeing those guys on street corners carrying signs that say, "Will design O-rings for food."

Yes it is pricey but much like the lottery in if you do not have a ticket there is no chance of winning.

SpaceNut · 2005-12-20 06:04:21

With this Space debris pierces lunar surface we have a reason to at least explore this location.

A surprise flash greeted NASA scientists when they reviewed a video tape of the lunar surface. The meteoroid touched down in the northwest region of the Moon's visible side. The impact occurred at 42.1° W, 36.5° N — a few degrees south of Mairan Crater, near where Oceanus Procellarum meets Mare Imbrium.

redhorizons · 2005-12-20 16:10:44

Rocketplane and their reusable Leer Jet are based out of Oklahoma City and are planning to fly out of a "Space Port" about a 2 hr dirve from OKC. The concept is much simpler than SS1 or 2 or which ever number and the price will be lower. The company is not screwing over any Oklahoma tax payers either, they just received a tax break to locate in OK and they converted most of the old Burns Flat air base into a "space port"... Yes it is nothing more than a carnival ride, but if I had the $$$ I would do it. for the same reason i bungy jumped and sky dived.
What I am exicted about is the economic and scientific benefit having Rocketplane in OKC will do for this area. Oklahoma is still seen as a backwards state filled with rednecks (because it is, LOL) but hopefully a successful suborbital/space tourism company here can help to bring some enlightenment...and help secure the demise of that crazy British fellow.

FunkyJ · 2006-02-09 07:58:25

I'm new and do not possibly have the energy or time to read this entire thread so I apologize in advance for repeating what might have been said.

The US of A stands for Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness
Canada stands for Peace, Order and Good Government

I feel we should go to Mars for;

Survival, Humanity and Ingenuity.

Survival: To demonstrate that it is possible to not only live but thrive on another planet. To prove that humans can live off the land no matter where we hang our hats and we don't need any additional support from our "homeland".

Humanity: Living on Mars will provide humans an oppertunity to look at ourselves as human. Not as Americans, Russians, Jews, CEO's, clog dancers or visionaries. We will look at ourselves as living on a planet and we will realise that those imaginary lines in the sand we infact, created. Countries are irrelevent, religeon (in time) becomes irrelevent, economics and politics become irrelevent. Imagine a second generation Martian talking to the President on the phone. The Martian wont care who this guy is in charge of 1 little country on 1 little planet-which is little more then a twinkle in the sky. Which leads to...

Ingenuity: No doubt a colony founded by the worlds best scientists, engineers, etc. will provide a strong consitution for such a endeavour. All of a sudden their are no rules when it comes to stem cell research, scientific testing. No Bush telling you not to build Methane/LOX engines. You are able to do what you feel is right. Martian patents within 3 generations guarenteed will surpass Earth based patents just because they will not have big companies, government or anyone else to compete with. Martians will also be on the forefront of interplanetary commerce, trade, new discoveries....all in the name of Humanity.

Being a Canadian (don't hold it against me) I am unfamiliar with how Americans settled their West but I know how we did it. First Canada laid claim to this massive chunk of land. Then we sold and gave away huge chunks of it to poor people. Then we were worried the Americans or Russians would claim the land also so we had to make good on our claim. So we gave massive tax breaks and gave away subsidies to CN Rail to build a railroad. 30 years was all it took to payback that lone through land taxes from taxing the poor.

-Send 200 people to Mars with basic survival tools and tell them to "fend for themselves". Once we do that....we are commited no matter who is elected next.

-FunkyJ

GCNRevenger · 2006-02-09 14:29:05

Starting to sound a little like Martian Republic... in reverse:

"We will look at ourselves as living on a planet and we will realise that those imaginary lines in the sand we infact, created... religeon (in time) becomes irrelevent"

Yep they are created, but that doesn't mean those lines don't exsist. People have been "making lines" for a very, very long time and they aren't going to stop just because you transplant some people to Mars.

And people have been "religious" for at least six or seven thousand years. Its not going to go away... and infact, I sure hope that it doesn't, religion is a part of humanity, a completly godless Mars would be a tragedy.

"Countries are irrelevent... economics become irrelevent... a colony founded by the worlds best scientists, engineers, etc. will provide a strong consitution for such a endeavour."

Um, no. There has to be some kind of economic system on Mars of some kind, or else there is no "working fluid" for material wellbeing of hypothetical Martians. And, for the forseeable future (we're talking a century), no Mars colony will be entirely self-sufficent from Earth. It simply costs so much to live on Mars, that some kind of support from the mother world will be a nessesity.

Overall, your vision for a utopian Mars sounds like a cross between a Marxist and a Leninist Communist state. As long as there is going to be any government, which there will just have to be to maintain colonies and support this constitution, there will be politics concerned with its function.

"All of a sudden their are no rules when it comes to stem cell research, scientific testing."

There will always be rules limiting research, because some research can cause material harm or be considerd immoral. Average Martian scientists should be regulated in playing with killer germs in an inclosed environment, and scientists should be regulated concerning human testing, etc etc.

"No Bush telling you not to build Methane/LOX engines."

Bush didn't say any such thing reguarding the Vision for Space Exploration, you rabid BDS-suffering fool... Griffin did, and he didn't cancel it, it is simply being postponed until when we DO need it. Right now, we really don't have to have it, and it may well slow VSE down.

"Martian patents within 3 generations guarenteed will surpass Earth based patents just because they will not have big companies, government or anyone else to compete with."

Again, you are going to have to have some kind of government to manage the colony, to keep the domes serviced and provide for a police and justice system, etc.

And Martian colonists three generations from now will still be flat broke, trying to keep their colonies viable.

Edit: Maybe not flat broke, but if you think that hypothetical Martians could build such a wildly sucessful civilization on a planet so harsh in only ~100 years, I think you are being much too optimistic.

Economic communism mixed with democratic government might be nessesarry for the functioning of an early colony where everybody wants to be there and wants to work together, but this will not always be the case. I don't think a communist economic system is ultimatly sustainable.

publiusr · 2006-02-09 14:56:38

I would like to see less restrictions and a new society take place on Mars--but we need infrastructure to do it with--and it will be a very long time before we see it.

And it will not be NASA bashing libertarians who take us there. It will be jobs and infrstructure. If we had launched 100 HLLVs instead of 100 STS missions, we might have had a modest base on the Moon or Mars by now--as well as several one-shot 100 ton space stations--or lighter stations in libration points. Each STS flight is in effect an HLLV flight--so we have been able to sustain a Moon/Mars program for 20 years--with NASA.

Not with Tumlinson's SFF nonsense.

GCNRevenger · 2006-02-09 17:21:21

Here is what I think is the best chance for Martian colonization:

-NASA goes to Mars and establishes a small science base (8-24 crew) perminantly using a NASA DRM-III type mission plan (perhaps swaping nuclear for bigger chemical rockets) that has access to ground water and a substantial fuel factory. This base would also serve to support reuseable light landers for crew and light cargo (launched on TheStick/EELV/Falcon-IX) transfers from orbit and back. This would enable crew transit and light cargo to be sent to Mars relativly cheaply, freeing up NASA money.

-A non-profit private organization is formed for the sole purpose of colonizing Mars. Its purpose will be to help build beyond the partially expendable transit system and base by offering an iron-clad contract trade:

As a Martian colonist volunteer, you agree to liquidate and donate every last penny of your Earthly wealth to the "Mars Colonization Organization" (MCO) and life long free service to the MCO. In return, you get a ride to Mars, basic room/board, and a vote in MCO governance. You will own nothing of signifigant value on Mars, ever, and will basically be subject to a strict Socialist economic system.

In this way, the MCO could perhaps accrue some serious money, particularly if the organization were formed early and the money invested well. NASA and/or the government(s) could pay into the MCO to help give it a "push" perhaps, and of course, donations are always welcome. To further sweeten the deal for people who want to go to Mars but not become a colonist, "tourist-workers" could pay all or part of what it costs to transport/support them in return for free labor (and publicity).

If you chance your mind about being a colonist or purposefully cause any disruption of the spirit or mechanism of the MCO (especially crime), gets you sent back to Earth, destitute.

-NASA or the MCO develops a high-Isp/high-thrust engine for fast/efficient transit to Mars without so much rocket fuel. A GCNR nuclear engine is the most probable option, but a nuclear salt water engine is also possible.

-NASA or the USAF or the MCO (or both) build a true, honest-to-goodness, this-time-we're-not-kidding, "no really!" space shuttle, or failing that, a space elevator. This combined with a bigger and more capable reuseable lander on Mars (perhaps modeled on DC-X) is the last piece of the puzzle, with cheap launch from Earth and high-power propulsion make transit to/from Mars radically cheaper.

-The MCO, with the binding concent of its volunteer citizens, incorporates itself as the legitmate government of a particular region of land on Mars. Then things change from setting up operations more to something that will consume all the energies of all the Martians for a very long time, which is to reduce the cost of operating the colony.

Computers, finely machined parts, rare elements, nuclear fuel, space suits, specialty materials, medical and scientific supplies, and allllll that are going to have to be imported from Earth for a long time, and it will take a concerted effort of generations to make the Mars colony independant enough from the Earth such that Mars (or the MCO at least) could buy what it needs using remaining investments and whatever meager export that could be arranged.

As the population grows however, I find it likly that the stagnation of the standard of living and discontent (probobly often Martian-born non-volunteers) will make the socialist economic system impractical to sustain, and there will be a time of transition, and capitalism would have to be instituted.

Edit: Oh, I ought to throw in another thought or two...

-A one way free ride back to Earth should be available to anyone that wants it, and for anyone that doesn't want it if they are deemed a "problem" by the MCO. Mars isn't Survivor Island, but as I am sure Rick Dobson would love the quote, "the good of the many outweighs the few."

-Colonist volunteers will not be equal opportunity, and will have to be selected carefully based on psychological compatibility, physical capability, skills & abilities, and yes... how much they can donate to the MCO. Persons advanced in age, physically frail, or "does not work well with others" will just have to be rejected. Families with children should also be excluded, since kids wouldn't handle the trip or the transition very well.

-Colonists will basically have to obey what the MCO dictates, especially as far as reproduction and reasource allocation. The MCO itself would be an essentially perfect democracy due to the small population.

BWhite · 2006-02-09 23:31:37

GCNRevenger, the Mormons might possibly be a group interested in being that non-profit organization you describe, except they probably haven't thought about it yet.

Otherwise, I cannot say I disagree much at all with your descriptions.

= = =

A MXER tether could allow bulk supplies to be transported at a relatively modest cost multiple over whatever Earth-to-LEO lift costs could be achieved.

Shay Guy · 2006-02-24 13:42:46

So, are you basically talking about a Martian kibbutz with the MCO? It's kind of a cool idea. I wonder if we'd see some moshavim as well?

Mars_B4_Moon · 2024-04-01 08:40:46

Statement on the Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget Request for NASA by The Planetary Society
https://www.planetary.org/press-release … et-request

Winners for the Moon Society’s First Moon Base Design Contest
https://www.moonsociety.org/news/2021/0 … n-contest/

Jeff Bezos video of his 1 Hour presentation on Space Colonies
https://gizmodo.com/heres-everything-je … 1834664129

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#201 2005-12-16 12:42:52

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#202 2005-12-16 18:19:20

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#203 2005-12-17 03:41:51

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#204 2005-12-17 11:48:29

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#205 2005-12-17 11:51:43

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#206 2005-12-17 11:56:25

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#207 2005-12-17 12:16:41

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#208 2005-12-17 12:49:17

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#209 2005-12-17 21:26:21

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#210 2005-12-17 22:13:10

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#211 2005-12-17 22:34:33

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#212 2005-12-17 22:55:18

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#213 2005-12-19 08:40:38

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#214 2005-12-20 06:04:21

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#215 2005-12-20 16:10:44

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#216 2006-02-09 07:58:25

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#217 2006-02-09 14:29:05

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#218 2006-02-09 14:56:38

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#219 2006-02-09 17:21:21

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#220 2006-02-09 23:31:37

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#221 2006-02-24 13:42:46

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

#222 2024-04-01 08:40:46

Re: What should be the focus of human space society/exploration?

Board footer