You are not logged in.
Democrats want to lose the war...
You sound like a broken record. A very boring one to boot.
Get over it. This is a board about Mars not about endless meaningless political quabbling
Someone studied walking on Mars: www.busoc.be/general/microgravity/walkingonmars.pdf
(pdf warning)
On the moon, due to the low gravity, it isn't even possible to walk normally, you *have* to bounce or run. I scanned the mercifully short article diagonally, and it looks that normal walking would be possible on Mars, though you'd go significantly slower. Going as fast as walking on Earth forces you to run.
If I read the diagram correctly, they launch, orbit Luna and then land on a twin earth? :?
Seriously, the diagram looks very involved, lots of docking, 6 launches per mission or am I mistaken?
300 personnel ( including mining, all sciences, and administration) .
Wouldn't it be far more cheaper to outsource most if not all administration to Earth? I mean, why spend $$$ for sending a guy/girl sitting at a desk @ Luna station doing a job you can do virtually everywhere else?
Come on, guys...
This is about NASA budget, go yapping about Putin in free chat, willya?
42 :?
Response in "Political Potlock I".
Ah. Very sane of you Robert. Thank you.
my blog is soooooo dead. I even forgot I had one (honestly)
I voted 'No' to make you think there were Chinese voters amongst us
Seriously, I voted 'no' because it would maybe be good to be beaten to Luna. I mean it's not a landgrab contest as during the time of the exploration of the new world, where one would land and then proclaim the place to be under rule and possession of (insert king of choice here).
There are laws that prohibit that today, signed by most countries around the world and I don't think any country would risk a war over that.
Let them be first, it will only strenghten the resolve of other players to be there TOO, out in force, and not a mere flag and footprints charade.
Ok Josh, sorry but people complained about this thread and this is going waaaaay offtopic, I'm sorry but I'll have to report you to Jos... Errr nevermind
Sounds good to me
Must be a real drag, logging in and getting this long list of spammers everytime to ban, I sure understand your irritation...
another point to contemplate: on Earth pics you see the cloudcovers have shadows (darker bands around their edges) so they clearly float above the surface. Not sure that's easy to implement, but paybe it's just a ne extra layer in your graphic package of choice.
I chose almost realistic, because you managed to implement the 'bright spot' on the globe, something I always look for in renderings (the 'hot spot where the sun reflects on the water I mean)
it's a bit too hazy around the edges compared to an actual Earth pic. to my liking. But that's probably realistic after all since Mars' atmosphere will be higher out than Earth's due to the lower gravity?
I posted that one, ATHLETE featured there too.
Maybe ATHLETE merits its own topic?
one of the 'buttons' above the errr... 'letterbox' in which you type your answers to post them. You can mouse over it to see how to use it..
[img]some direct http:// link to a pic[/img]
(I disabled BBCode in this post otherwise you wouldn't see the code but the Bulletin-board rendering-engine would try to actually put up a picture called http:/link to a pic, heehee
Lennon and Stalin. .
Let it be, heehee...
Hi Melvin, and welcome to New Mars.
http://www.newmars.com/forums/profile.p … ile&u=1951
human spammer, not a bot
Nasawatch doesn't report it once again reported a sensationalistic piece of shite
Seriously, when I see the word 'Nasawatch', I become very wary, all he can do is naysaying to anything NASA does. It's just pathetic.