RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 143,144
Posts: 5,596,695
Members: 25,394
Currently online: 608
Newest member: HFMudd

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: When It Rains…
By: Michelle on Feb 27

Nimoy Dead At Eighty-Three
By: T'Bonz on Feb 27

Breaking news: Leonard Nimoy – ‘Mr Spock’ – dies aged 83
By: AntonyF on Feb 27

Hurley Passes
By: T'Bonz on Feb 26

USS Excelsior Model Coming Soon
By: T'Bonz on Feb 25

Hemsworth To Host SNL
By: T'Bonz on Feb 25

Quinto To Guest Star On HBO Comedy
By: T'Bonz on Feb 25

Wheaton To Voice Firefly Game
By: T'Bonz on Feb 24

Nimoy Health Scare
By: T'Bonz on Feb 24

Star Trek #42 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Feb 23


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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 28 2010, 06:45 AM   #211
drychlick
Captain
 
Location: phoenix. az
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

yes now is not the time for any big plan too much money on any moon plan ! but we have 4 billton year till the sun goes nova! so we have the time
drychlick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 06:47 AM   #212
omegaone
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Australia
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

and if an Asteroid hits us in the mean time?
omegaone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 09:14 AM   #213
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
 
Location: ANS Yamato, Sector 5, Sol System
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

Captain Kirk wrote: View Post
That article says that it would cost 3 billion per year beyond the current NASA budget.

So, the amount of money the government spent to give to people to get them to throw away perfectly good cars and buy a new car that they don't need and probably can't afford would have funded the project for another year.
Building better transit and better automobiles is hardly a waste of money, except to people who vote for a leader who takes a lot of time off, can't speak properly, and sends people off to die in bogus wars based on bogus intel. And who didn't care about space travel before, or do anything about it himself.

Just that one useless program, let alone the trillions spent to dismantle the health care system or to bail out Wall Street.
I thought that people like yourself loved Wall Street, to the point of beating up Michael Moore when he or anybody else criticizes it, and to the point of buying stocks in the hope of striking it rich. And your mediocre 'health care' system is not much worth saving, anyway.

But a hundred billion or so to go to the moon and on to Mars? Hell no, we can't afford that. What, are you nuts?

I was expecting this as sure as the sun coming up in the morning, but it still makes me angry.
Hey Sherlock, he didn't, and hasn't, acted on anything yet.

Mr. B wrote: View Post
I can't say I disagree with the recommendation to dump Ares. The whole Constellation program seems like a step back from the space shuttle. Personally (irrelevant opinion), I'd rather see them putting heavy resources into a next generation reusable craft
Me too. And I wish that said next generation craft be spaceplanes like the ones that were planed in the US and the UK, and in pre-war Germany by Eugen Sanger.

T'Girl wrote: View Post
Time to drag NERVA off that dusty shelf.
Something I've been saying for a while.

Last edited by Dusty Ayres; January 28 2010 at 09:52 AM.
Dusty Ayres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 04:01 PM   #214
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

I would like to get to Mars sooner. But the simple fact is, we can't. Even if we had the money we could not go. They can't keep the damn toilet working on the IIS. On a Mars mission, there are not spare parts for everything. You can't turn around. At minimum you looking at 18mths. That is the whole point in going to the moon. We need something relatively close to test methods and technology for long term trips.

As for using Direct Jupiter, we have billions of $'s and years invested in Ares. The test flight last year went better than expected. So why scrap it now? We're already going to be out of manned space travel for 4+ years after the Shuttle is retired this year. That will be even longer if we start over now. Finish the program you have. I would consider scrapping it if Ares I-X failed, but it didn't. We can debate whether to finish the moon part of it.

Don't get me wrong, initially I did not agree with the design they were using. So much was being wasted. I was hoping for a smaller version of the shuttle or at least a completely reusable system which preserves the service module. I don't like the flex plan either, because they take the time and money to assemble a large craft and throw it away after the return trip. You would think it would be worth the extra money to park it in orbit for reuse.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 04:08 PM   #215
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

Forgot to mention, I do support using nuclear for deep space flights. Would be great if they could get a gaseous core reactor working. I wonder if they could use a Liquid metal cooled nuclear reactor, liquid metal fast reactor?
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 04:52 PM   #216
John Picard
Vice Admiral
 
John Picard's Avatar
 
Location: Waiting for Dorian Thompson to invite me to lunch
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
I would like to get to Mars sooner. But the simple fact is, we can't. Even if we had the money we could not go. They can't keep the damn toilet working on the IIS. On a Mars mission, there are not spare parts for everything. You can't turn around. At minimum you looking at 18mths. That is the whole point in going to the moon. We need something relatively close to test methods and technology for long term trips.

As for using Direct Jupiter, we have billions of $'s and years invested in Ares. The test flight last year went better than expected. So why scrap it now? We're already going to be out of manned space travel for 4+ years after the Shuttle is retired this year. That will be even longer if we start over now. Finish the program you have. I would consider scrapping it if Ares I-X failed, but it didn't. We can debate whether to finish the moon part of it.

Don't get me wrong, initially I did not agree with the design they were using. So much was being wasted. I was hoping for a smaller version of the shuttle or at least a completely reusable system which preserves the service module. I don't like the flex plan either, because they take the time and money to assemble a large craft and throw it away after the return trip. You would think it would be worth the extra money to park it in orbit for reuse.
Go to Mars for ---? Are we that much in need of ice?
__________________
Don't like my posts? Fill out a report.
Psssstttt - Dorian, my location.
John Picard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 05:06 PM   #217
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

John Picard wrote: View Post
Go to Mars for ---? Are we that much in need of ice?
Eventually to colonize Mars. But first we need to explore that world in person.

If we stay here, sooner or later we'll go extinct. Either we'll wipe each other out, competing for resources and political stupidity. Some will just want to conquer. Or, we could be wiped out by some kind of cataclysmic natural disaster or plague. By expanding out into the solar system and eventually the stars, we reduce the risk of extinction.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 06:01 PM   #218
John Picard
Vice Admiral
 
John Picard's Avatar
 
Location: Waiting for Dorian Thompson to invite me to lunch
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
John Picard wrote: View Post
Go to Mars for ---? Are we that much in need of ice?
Eventually to colonize Mars. But first we need to explore that world in person.

If we stay here, sooner or later we'll go extinct. Either we'll wipe each other out, competing for resources and political stupidity. Some will just want to conquer. Or, we could be wiped out by some kind of cataclysmic natural disaster or plague. By expanding out into the solar system and eventually the stars, we reduce the risk of extinction.
Yeah, and the H1N1 virus is going to get us Take a course in biology, where you'll learn that the more educated and economically prosperous a country/people become, the more the birth rate declines. But, go ahead and keep repeating the "Oh noes, teh sky iz falling" mantra
__________________
Don't like my posts? Fill out a report.
Psssstttt - Dorian, my location.
John Picard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 06:04 PM   #219
Meredith
Vice Admiral
 
Meredith's Avatar
 
Location: Abh Space
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

Seems like we won't be able to reach Mars or the Moon again at least untill 2100.

That is unless someone comes up with an extremely easy way to generate Zero Point Energy that is easily converted to electrical energy using a wad of chewing gum, tinfoil, a kettle, and bits of small multicolored string. Then another person comes up with a sure fire way to convert electrical energy into inertial gradients that can easily be controlled by using a toaster oven, shrinky dinks and a roll of duct tape.

Right now it kind of feels like we are going backwards and that the stars are just as far away as they were in the late 1800's when we only had the fanciful musings of H.G. Wells to placate those whose gazes were directed upwards towards the heavens.
__________________
Laws only work if everyone is honest, no piece of paper is going to stop a truly deranged person from doing something atrocious.
Meredith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 06:38 PM   #220
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

[QUOTE=John Picard;3792559]
ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
Yeah, and the H1N1 virus is going to get us Take a course in biology, where you'll learn that the more educated and economically prosperous a country/people become, the more the birth rate declines. But, go ahead and keep repeating the "Oh noes, teh sky iz falling" mantra
It sure looks like it fell on the dinosaurs.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 07:44 PM   #221
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
I would like to get to Mars sooner. But the simple fact is, we can't. Even if we had the money we could not go. They can't keep the damn toilet working on the IIS. On a Mars mission, there are not spare parts for everything. You can't turn around. At minimum you looking at 18mths. That is the whole point in going to the moon. We need something relatively close to test methods and technology for long term trips.

As for using Direct Jupiter, we have billions of $'s and years invested in Ares. The test flight last year went better than expected. So why scrap it now? We're already going to be out of manned space travel for 4+ years after the Shuttle is retired this year. That will be even longer if we start over now. Finish the program you have. I would consider scrapping it if Ares I-X failed, but it didn't. We can debate whether to finish the moon part of it.

Don't get me wrong, initially I did not agree with the design they were using. So much was being wasted. I was hoping for a smaller version of the shuttle or at least a completely reusable system which preserves the service module. I don't like the flex plan either, because they take the time and money to assemble a large craft and throw it away after the return trip. You would think it would be worth the extra money to park it in orbit for reuse.
You really don't understand the problems with Ares. Go to Nasaspaceflight.com and read what the actual "rocket scientists" think.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 08:12 PM   #222
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

[QUOTE=sojourner;3792836]
ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
You really don't understand the problems with Ares. Go to Nasaspaceflight.com and read what the actual "rocket scientists" think.
I have read about the problems. The point is it is too late to stop it. I would only except that if they continue the Shuttle 3 - 4 times a year until a replacement is ready. I don't trust Russia and China. I know of no private program that has built a manned craft that can reach the ISS. As much as I liked Spaceship One, it contained no automation. The passengers fly without pressure suits. It is questionable if it could safely land if the rocket failed to fire. I pray they've addressed these issues for SpaceShip Two.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 08:34 PM   #223
Ensign_Redshirt
Commodore
 
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
I don't trust Russia and China.
NASA won't use Chinese spacecraft for the foreseeable future anyway.


ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
I know of no private program that has built a manned craft that can reach the ISS.
Well, it seems they're a bit behind schedule now, but SpaceX’s Dragon capsule is supposed to become operational sometime in 2010. They already have a contract with NASA to ferry personnel and cargo to the ISS. And one thing is sure: The development of the Dragon is at a more advanced stage than Orion's. So why waste more money on the Orion when there's an alternative spacecraft which will be ready much sooner?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Dragon


ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
As much as I liked Spaceship One, it contained no automation. The passengers fly without pressure suits. It is questionable if it could safely land if the rocket failed to fire. I pray they've addressed these issues for SpaceShip Two.
SpaceShipOne and SpaceShipTwo are unsuitable for NASA's needs anyway. Both are merely capable of conducting suborbital flight.

Last edited by Ensign_Redshirt; January 28 2010 at 10:51 PM.
Ensign_Redshirt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 09:01 PM   #224
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
If we stay here, sooner or later we'll go extinct.
Sooner or later we'll go extinct.

Period, full stop.

Space exploration doesn't hold the answer to a single of our pressing problems - economic, political or even simple survival. It's laughable that people continue to propose that we can use spaceships to deal with population pressures, or the hunt for natural resources to sustain our economic expansion. Even if there's some validity to the latter (and it's negligible) the enormous amount of time and money that will have to be initially devoted to developing the means to locate and make use of such resources way down the line will never justify the effort from the POV of time-bound human beings.

People like human space exploration because it's cool. The idea excites them. If it ever turns out that there's a "there," there it will be many centuries after we've all turned to dust and no one here will ever know about it.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28 2010, 09:48 PM   #225
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: Obama Space Plan: Return to Moon: "No Go"

[QUOTE=ConRefit79;3792902]
sojourner wrote: View Post
ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
You really don't understand the problems with Ares. Go to Nasaspaceflight.com and read what the actual "rocket scientists" think.
I have read about the problems. The point is it is too late to stop it. I would only except that if they continue the Shuttle 3 - 4 times a year until a replacement is ready. I don't trust Russia and China. I know of no private program that has built a manned craft that can reach the ISS. As much as I liked Spaceship One, it contained no automation. The passengers fly without pressure suits. It is questionable if it could safely land if the rocket failed to fire. I pray they've addressed these issues for SpaceShip Two.
Nope, it's not nearly too late to stop. Ares I-X, while it may have looked like Ares I, had virtually no components that would actually have been used on Ares I. The Ares I design was so bad that Orion has consistently lost capability (no dry landing, reduced size, no longer reusable, vibration issues from Ares, lol - no toilet) to the point that Dragon will be just as good if not better. Ares V is even less further along, being nothing more than powerpoint presentations.

And who the hell brought up SS2? it can't even achieve orbit, has no docking port, and can't survive re-entry from orbit.

Save money by ditching Ares I, V now. Put Orion on Atlas V (with it's capabilities restored) and develop a HLV using something like the Direct/Jupiter architecture. You'll save money and time while increasing capability.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 01:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.