RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,571
Posts: 5,423,367
Members: 24,810
Currently online: 463
Newest member: toaster

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Takei Has Growth Removed
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12

New Wizkids Attack Wing Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Coto Drama Sold To Fox
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Braga Inks Deal
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Remastered Original Series Re-release
By: T'Bonz on Sep 11

UK Trek Ships Calendar Debuts
By: T'Bonz on Sep 10


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science and Technology

Science and Technology "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan.

View Poll Results: The USAF can get NASA to Mars?
Strongly agree 4 9.09%
Agree 4 9.09%
Maybe 7 15.91%
Disagree 5 11.36%
Strongly disagree 28 63.64%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 44. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 19 2009, 08:14 PM   #46
Herbert
Captain
 
Herbert's Avatar
 
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

The original question also presumes that the United States Air Force is more competent than the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I have seen no evidence that the United States Air Force is any more objective than NASA when it comes to procuring launch systems or they would be more successful if resuming moon landings and a voyage to Mars became a military mission.
Herbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23 2009, 05:04 AM   #47
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
 
Location: ANS Yamato, Sector 5, Sol System
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

John Picard wrote: View Post
One issue I see with a nuclear propelled vehicle is having a nuclear physicist on board to monitor and adjust the reactor as needed.
Big deal, just put one in as part of the flight crew, and they check out the reactor(s) as needed to, like any engineer usually does on a nuclear powered ship on Earth. No big whoop.

And such a ship would (and should be) built in space anyway, in a spacedock adjacent to the ISS. No protests would happen.
Dusty Ayres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23 2009, 05:37 AM   #48
Rii
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Adelaide
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

Dusty Ayres wrote: View Post
And such a ship would (and should be) built in space anyway
Not this again.

Rii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23 2009, 08:03 PM   #49
John Picard
Vice Admiral
 
John Picard's Avatar
 
Location: Waiting for Dorian Thompson to invite me to lunch
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

Dusty Ayres wrote: View Post
John Picard wrote: View Post
One issue I see with a nuclear propelled vehicle is having a nuclear physicist on board to monitor and adjust the reactor as needed.
Big deal, just put one in as part of the flight crew, and they check out the reactor(s) as needed to, like any engineer usually does on a nuclear powered ship on Earth. No big whoop.
Do you have any idea how many men it takes to monitor the reactors of a Nimitz class carrier?

And such a ship would (and should be) built in space anyway, in a spacedock adjacent to the ISS. No protests would happen.
No protests? People will be howling about what could happen should there be an accident and any nuclear material enter the earth's atmostphere.

You didn't think this one through, did you?
__________________
Don't like my posts? Fill out a report.
Psssstttt - Dorian, my location.
John Picard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2009, 01:52 PM   #50
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
 
Location: ANS Yamato, Sector 5, Sol System
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

John Picard wrote: View Post
Dusty Ayres wrote: View Post
John Picard wrote: View Post
One issue I see with a nuclear propelled vehicle is having a nuclear physicist on board to monitor and adjust the reactor as needed.
Big deal, just put one in as part of the flight crew, and they check out the reactor(s) as needed to, like any engineer usually does on a nuclear powered ship on Earth. No big whoop.
Do you have any idea how many men it takes to monitor the reactors of a Nimitz class carrier?

And such a ship would (and should be) built in space anyway, in a spacedock adjacent to the ISS. No protests would happen.
No protests? People will be howling about what could happen should there be an accident and any nuclear material enter the earth's atmostphere.

You didn't think this one through, did you?
Oh, but I did, since it's going to be like, what, I don't know-millions of miles up the gravity well? And also that if anything happens, the fissionables can be shot into a higher orbit? Or towards the sun? See, I do think these things through, unlike most of the people who object to this idea.

Think that I'm full of shit? Read Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars), but especially Red Mars, to see what I just said about needing NERVA.

Last edited by Dusty Ayres; February 25 2009 at 11:00 PM.
Dusty Ayres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2009, 03:24 PM   #51
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

Nuclear powered propulsion systems are needed if we are to become an interplanetary civilization - if we are to cross the large distances between planets effectively.

Chemical power may have been enough for car and planes, but it's far from sufficient if we are to ever develop some form of interplanetary commerce. It just doesn't generate enough energy.
Today's chemical powered rockets are very expansive and they can barely reach the orbit. A chemical rocket will transport only a few astronauts to Mars in 6 months, after billions are spent on a single mission.
The chemical propulsion's potential is exhausted.

You want to colonize Mars, to move millions of people there? You want to exploit the asteroid belt? Even with a space elevator, you couldn't do that in less than centuries with chemically propelled interplanetary craft.
ProtoAvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2009, 07:09 PM   #52
J.T.B.
Commodore
 
J.T.B.'s Avatar
 
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

Dusty Ayres wrote: View Post
Oh, but I did, since it's going to be like, what, I don't know-millions of miles up the gravity well? And also that if anything happens, the fissionables can be shot into a higher orbit? Or towards the sun? See, I do thinks these things through, unlike most of the people who object to this idea.
Doesn't the nuclear fuel have to be lifted from surface to orbit at some point? An accident in that phase is what I thought of when I read the earlier comment.

--Justin
J.T.B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2009, 11:03 PM   #53
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
 
Location: ANS Yamato, Sector 5, Sol System
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Nuclear powered propulsion systems are needed if we are to become an interplanetary civilization - if we are to cross the large distances between planets effectively.

Chemical power may have been enough for car and planes, but it's far from sufficient if we are to ever develop some form of interplanetary commerce. It just doesn't generate enough energy.
Today's chemical powered rockets are very expansive and they can barely reach the orbit. A chemical rocket will transport only a few astronauts to Mars in 6 months, after billions are spent on a single mission.
The chemical propulsion's potential is exhausted.

You want to colonize Mars, to move millions of people there? You want to exploit the asteroid belt? Even with a space elevator, you couldn't do that in less than centuries with chemically propelled interplanetary craft.
Smart words from a smart person.
Dusty Ayres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26 2009, 11:59 AM   #54
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Should the USAF take over incompetent NASA?

Dusty Ayres wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Nuclear powered propulsion systems are needed if we are to become an interplanetary civilization - if we are to cross the large distances between planets effectively.

Chemical power may have been enough for car and planes, but it's far from sufficient if we are to ever develop some form of interplanetary commerce. It just doesn't generate enough energy.
Today's chemical powered rockets are very expansive and they can barely reach the orbit. A chemical rocket will transport only a few astronauts to Mars in 6 months, after billions are spent on a single mission.
The chemical propulsion's potential is exhausted.

You want to colonize Mars, to move millions of people there? You want to exploit the asteroid belt? Even with a space elevator, you couldn't do that in less than centuries with chemically propelled interplanetary craft.
Smart words from a smart person.

Thanks!
ProtoAvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
nasa, usaf

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.