Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst
1
2
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Beazy View Post
    Why doesnt NASA and SpaceX just team up and speed this shit up. I want to see space faring humans before I die. . . is that so much to ask?
    Actually that is EXACTLY what is happening. The entire POINT of the Trump directive is to do exactly what you just said. Trump gave a directive for NASA to work with private companies to speed up the process of going to the Moon and Mars. That's why a lot of this is getting farmed out to private companies. That's why they were able to accelerate the manned lunar mission to 2024.

    You should read the links and see who has been awarded contracts so far.
    Last edited by Kokolums; 2019-06-21 at 12:40 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kokolums View Post
    I want the ruins of K'aresh for 9.0 as I envision it as Netherstorm on steroids. A broken, shattered world. Eco-domes are stuck on various chunks to protect flora & fauna. I imagine a K'aresh ocean & maybe some islands contained in an eco dome or a snow-capped peak with some jungle valleys in another. Flesh version of Ethereals that never got altered. Space platforms as in Starcraft. Just a totally fantastic tileset & theme that I'd be very keen to explore. They could do some wild things.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Oh they were all assholes but Artemis was a special kind of asshole. Just search for the story of Orion and how he ended up a constellation.
    Also that guy who accidentally found her while taking a bath.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Hephaestus was awesome, though totally a cuck.
    Except when he caught the guy cockolding him in a steel mesh trap. That was wicked.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Flarelaine View Post
    Also that guy who accidentally found her while taking a bath.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Except when he caught the guy cockolding him in a steel mesh trap. That was wicked.
    Probably the best was Callisto though. Girl was raped and because being raped meant that she violated her oaths of chastity to Artemis, she transformed her into a bear and tried to have her son (product of her rape) to kill her. That's . . . twisted. Like, Handmaid's Tale levels of misogyny
    Hail Lilith and see you in Hell!

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Probably the best was Callisto though. Girl was raped and because being raped meant that she violated her oaths of chastity to Artemis, she transformed her into a bear and tried to have her son (product of her rape) to kill her. That's . . . twisted. Like, Handmaid's Tale levels of misogyny
    That, too.

    All them Greek myths are really telling... about us humans. Still, there are nice bits such as Phylemon and Baucis. And poignant bits, usually around some prophecy and collision with fate. Antigone is a favourite heroine of mine.

  5. #25
    There are a lot of missions coming in the next 4-5 years. And NASA will be in 2026 ready to cut the ISS out of funding completely. Hence, the goal of getting commercial and private enterprise into the vacuum behind NASA. NASA belongs at the FRONT, the BLEEDING edge of discovery and boundaries where things are hard, expensive, and long. LAwlz! Private industry always follows they will take up the slack of shuttling astronauts or whoever to LEO and and doing the small missions that NASA doesn't really have the business of doing anymore. NASA needs to be pushing the frontier and blazing the path, then the private companies come in and pick up the contracts, make things cheap and available.

    Boeing and SpaceX extremely good at what they do so far, will have the job of getting people to LEO with their own NASA certified capsules and so on. Which frees up NASA's budget to put forward to Mars missions. Once NASA starts construction on Gateway with SLS and maybe the help of other rockets, "which is so far yet to be rated or certified". NASA will then drop off some more old stuff in prep for consistent 1 year stays at the high lunar orbits. These high lunar orbits will be able to ferry down the next LONG list of people ready to study, research further, dig, build, discover things on the moon. Yeah we did it in the 60's, "Well technically we only sent 1 scientist to the moon"(Geologist). Should we not want to send people from other fields to study the applications for building, mining, research, habitation, so on?

    Setting up a platform of Consistent research, building, etc on the moon. Why can't we do this? Why can't we do this, and do all the things that people are complaining about, "down here on Earth". Sorry but, the things in space have significantly affected everything here on Earth since we've began going to space. Because, Space has near limitless potential of resources, and research. Everyone should not limit their focus but broaden the horizon yet hone in on specific elements to build a space EMPIRE!

    I though am curious to see how Bigelow Aerospace plays a roll in design, function, maintenance, of future inflatable modules for surface bases or orbiting stations. I find that bases on a surface probably better suited to be rigid and tough. We need to start building up companies to fabricate diggers, movers, cranes, and storage.

    Sorry I jump around a lot but, I see grand massive views of space assets and the infinite potentiality of it all.

    Steps:

    1. Power generation, storage, and ISRU(In Situ Resource Utilization). This is a package deal in my eyes, utilizing the setup, creation, building, maintaining, and further creation of extended solar power generation fields on the lunar surface. We're talking something at least the size of what is in Nevada's desserts outside Tesla's Gigafactory. Inplementaion of underground storage tanks, devices, and buildings to help shield against radiation exposure and solar wind. Take advantage of the thermal differences in temperature to create a sort of thermal heating cycle, which then can be used to help provide power, and water from the condensation collection of the trace amounts of water. That condensation of water would be generated by some structure massive in scale that takes advantage of the rapid changes in temperature and the moisture content on the surface or sub-surface lunar crust.

    2. Definitely need to create some sort of partially underground food "bio-dome". In the bio dome it needs to have a roof filter made of water, and the combining gases in our atmosphere to filter out the solar x-rays, and things that are pretty harmful to us. Also, this dome can be partially underground and above ground for obvious reasons like sunlight and sub-roof moisture collection as well. This has to be a consistent thing so that at least 1 year full supply of food can be held at all times until self sufficiency.

    3. Habitation and Rigid Modular Construction: I think that having buildings with room for 4 persons comfortably sealed from the outside with airlocks and whatnot. Must have all connecting tunnels, other buildings, exercise facilities, mess hall, research, maintenance, etc. All connected to cut the amount of outside exposure to harmful space weather. All the facilities must have the same shielding ideas that are used in Steps 1 and 2. With all this building must come maintenance and construction "IS". Need to come up with designs, mapping, locations far enough away for research gathering, storage, building, and manufacturing of parts, and pieces.

    4. Research: This has to be the last step and in this order because, the needs roles above. The goal to the entire program as lite in detail as I tried to be without writing a book, should be to create a potential self sufficient ecosystem for habitation and functional stabilized human exploration. Research is CRITICAL to learning about how to better utilize our space assets and future space missions. How can we make better spacesuits, how do we become faster at mounting expeditions, how to rapidly create emergency planning and so on. Is it safe to reproduce in space or on another celestial body? What are the consequences or long term benefits, detriments, and effects. Can animals ever function properly in low G environments, altered digestion, brain function, visual stimulus and side affects. What kinds of planning is taken to better life on Earth and beyond. Can we grow, reproduce, and live effectively longer than 1-80 years or indefinitely in space. What are the long term evolutionary changes, traits, pluses, minuses. Extend to creating missions as long as 5 years. Push into laser communication for extremely long distance messages. When it takes 8 hours for messages by Radio Waves to get from the outer solar system to earth, that's too long. Managing time is important to humans, and mission success or failure.

    After all of the long term build up, and habitation, and so on at the moon. Then at that point we can go to Mars to live. Except on Mars, it has VASTLY more resources akin to Earth than does the Moon to Earth. Mars will be a vastly easier challenge to live on than the moon.

    I say lets do it.... Lets get moving peeps because, at the rate we're going. Earth is bleeding at this point, not dying but, it's wounded a little by humans. Plus it only makes sense to NOT have all one's eggs(Humans) in one basket. I'd rather be a species of interplanetary, interstellar, or intergalactic means than still getting our energy from dead things. I mean come on.... It's the only way.

    I could go on in extreme point by point by idea detail but, this would literally take me years.

    We can do this if we really speedily wanted to.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Sorry, I am really excited about all the space missions going on in the last 3 years. I'm ready, lets do it.

  6. #26
    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50140572

    Jeff Bezos has announced the formation of a "national team" that will aim to build the lander that will take astronauts back to the Moon in 2024.

    Bezos' space company Blue Origin has teamed up with aerospace giants Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Draper to bid for the landing system.

    The White House has set the ambitious goal of sending a man and a woman to the lunar South Pole within five years.

    Bezos outlined the plan at a meeting in Washington DC.




    - - - Updated - - -

    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50070615

    NASA unveils new space suit for moon landing.



    - - - Updated - - -

    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49759627

    NASAs Moon Rocket Takes Shape

    Quote Originally Posted by Kokolums View Post
    I want the ruins of K'aresh for 9.0 as I envision it as Netherstorm on steroids. A broken, shattered world. Eco-domes are stuck on various chunks to protect flora & fauna. I imagine a K'aresh ocean & maybe some islands contained in an eco dome or a snow-capped peak with some jungle valleys in another. Flesh version of Ethereals that never got altered. Space platforms as in Starcraft. Just a totally fantastic tileset & theme that I'd be very keen to explore. They could do some wild things.

  7. #27
    The Unstoppable Force Skroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    22,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Kokolums View Post
    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50140572

    Jeff Bezos has announced the formation of a "national team" that will aim to build the lander that will take astronauts back to the Moon in 2024.

    Bezos' space company Blue Origin has teamed up with aerospace giants Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Draper to bid for the landing system.

    The White House has set the ambitious goal of sending a man and a woman to the lunar South Pole within five years.

    Bezos outlined the plan at a meeting in Washington DC.




    - - - Updated - - -

    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50070615

    NASA unveils new space suit for moon landing.



    - - - Updated - - -

    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49759627

    NASAs Moon Rocket Takes Shape

    Its hilarious that for our Putin-wannabe President, Artemis remains a very Russian Space Mission.

    Artemis right now, is a fantasy. It's a lander that isn't designed, combined with a rocket that hasn't flown and costs $1.3 billion per launch, and a capsule that is over designed for its purpose and way, way too expensive per unit.

    It's a bunch of CG art, and a bunch of statements of intent, some logos, and nothing more.

    Without the Exploration Upper Stage, which won't be ready for the Artemis 3 in 2024, the mission architecture relies on multiple Block Is and commercial spacecraft (namely, Falcons).

    This is the plan. It's a really bad plan.



    Most notable is that the Lunar lander will have to be launched to the Lunar Platform-Gateway via THREE commercial flights, and be assembled. The Habitation, Descent and Ascent modules will all be on different flights. Which means the first integrated test will be on the landing attempt.

    They didn't even do this during Apollo. For good reason. They staged Apollo 10 first.

    Between the time table and the mission manifest, this is an invitation for astronauts to be stranded on the moon... or the US gets lucky if it doesn't happen.

    Landing on the moon is basically pointless. The rationale for the Gateway station is to use it as the framework for the Mars Transit Vehicle. The technologies utilized for Lunar missions are incompatible with a Mars mission. The money is better spent on developing the engines and technologies for Mars, rather than planting a flag at great risk and expense on a place the US has been, and leaving.

    And more to the point, multiple Falcon Heavy's are both more capable and a fraction of the cost of the Senate Launch System. Years ago, I was a vocal advocate of the SLS here. But the economics changed and the technology improved. The launch and landing technology of SpaceX made the SLS obsolete before it flew. The only reason it exists is to keep Alabama in the rocket building business. It is flying pork.

    Fortunately, because the budget doesn't fund it, the mission won't actually happen.
    We're Taking Your President Away From You. | Users with <20 posts and ignored posters are invisible. Find out how to do that here and clean up MMO-OT!

  8. #28
    Technically, Apollo 13 was stranded and dead. They still found a way to get everyone home.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kokolums View Post
    I want the ruins of K'aresh for 9.0 as I envision it as Netherstorm on steroids. A broken, shattered world. Eco-domes are stuck on various chunks to protect flora & fauna. I imagine a K'aresh ocean & maybe some islands contained in an eco dome or a snow-capped peak with some jungle valleys in another. Flesh version of Ethereals that never got altered. Space platforms as in Starcraft. Just a totally fantastic tileset & theme that I'd be very keen to explore. They could do some wild things.

  9. #29
    The Insane PACOX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The Upside Down
    Posts
    19,157
    I believe it when I see it. Boeing and SpaceX were supposed have their manned test done or a few weeks away by now. SpaceX managed to build a new silver...toy though.

  10. #30
    The Unstoppable Force Skroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    22,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Kokolums View Post
    Technically, Apollo 13 was stranded and dead. They still found a way to get everyone home.
    Apollo 13 utilized physics and the engine of the Lunar Module to make put themselves in a free return trajectory around the moon. It was a disaster for the mission, but also eminently solvable because of the physics of slingshot around the moon, and that they had an engine they could fire.

    That is a very different kind of problem than landing on the moon, only to find the ascent stage of the lander doesn't work as planned. If that happens, they're dead. The US will never be able to fly another mission, with another lander, in the time they have to survive (their on-surface oxygen supplies being the ultimate limit). It will take months to assembly a new LM. And weeks to get all three pieces on the launch pad, then to lunar orbit, connected there, and then landed. Oxygen supplies for Artemis 3 won't last that long by far.

    The idea of doing a lunar landing mission with a new LM that doesn't have an Apollo 10 analog is insane. It's also why it is never going to happen. The 2024 date is there right now just to not tilt the manchild in the oval office, for as short a time he has left (thanks to today's bombshell). But make no mistake. The moment he's gone, that's going to miraculously become 2026-2028, as NASA does the test flights it needs to in order to not kill people.

    If it does it at all, which I doubt. Because nothing used as part of the Artemis program is relevant to Mars. And none of it has been funded.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    I believe it when I see it. Boeing and SpaceX were supposed have their manned test done or a few weeks away by now. SpaceX managed to build a new silver...toy though.
    SpaceX has been dragging its feet with Dragon2. It's making money hand over fist with Falcon 9 launches, and it knows how the Dragon 2 story ends. It'll fly in its manned configuration perhaps a dozen times (cargo-unmanned 20+ times), then the ISS will be de-orbited, thus ending the purpose of Dragon 2, which plays no role in SpaceX's core business or future space plans.

    And for Boeing, when RD-180 engines dry up and Atlas V launches cease in a few years, they have no in-house launch vehicle for the Starliner, especially since Vulcan-Centaur isn't anywhere close to a test launch. They may have to buy flights on the SpaceX Falcon 9, which will fly the Starliner, in order to meet their contract obligations.

    For SpaceX especially, Dragon2 basically arrived too late. It's an important advance in capsule design, but it's basically a legacy of a different business than it is now. When Starship (BFR) flies next decade, Dragon will be even more obsolete.
    We're Taking Your President Away From You. | Users with <20 posts and ignored posters are invisible. Find out how to do that here and clean up MMO-OT!

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    Its hilarious that for our Putin-wannabe President, Artemis remains a very Russian Space Mission.

    Artemis right now, is a fantasy. It's a lander that isn't designed, combined with a rocket that hasn't flown and costs $1.3 billion per launch, and a capsule that is over designed for its purpose and way, way too expensive per unit.

    It's a bunch of CG art, and a bunch of statements of intent, some logos, and nothing more.

    Without the Exploration Upper Stage, which won't be ready for the Artemis 3 in 2024, the mission architecture relies on multiple Block Is and commercial spacecraft (namely, Falcons).

    This is the plan. It's a really bad plan.



    Most notable is that the Lunar lander will have to be launched to the Lunar Platform-Gateway via THREE commercial flights, and be assembled. The Habitation, Descent and Ascent modules will all be on different flights. Which means the first integrated test will be on the landing attempt.

    They didn't even do this during Apollo. For good reason. They staged Apollo 10 first.

    Between the time table and the mission manifest, this is an invitation for astronauts to be stranded on the moon... or the US gets lucky if it doesn't happen.

    Landing on the moon is basically pointless. The rationale for the Gateway station is to use it as the framework for the Mars Transit Vehicle. The technologies utilized for Lunar missions are incompatible with a Mars mission. The money is better spent on developing the engines and technologies for Mars, rather than planting a flag at great risk and expense on a place the US has been, and leaving.

    And more to the point, multiple Falcon Heavy's are both more capable and a fraction of the cost of the Senate Launch System. Years ago, I was a vocal advocate of the SLS here. But the economics changed and the technology improved. The launch and landing technology of SpaceX made the SLS obsolete before it flew. The only reason it exists is to keep Alabama in the rocket building business. It is flying pork.

    Fortunately, because the budget doesn't fund it, the mission won't actually happen.
    Landing on the moon is far from pointless. I've always had the opinion that not pushing the moon after landing on it in the first place set our species back technologically decades. We should already have a fully fleshed out moon base, if not a colony. All of this would have been set up through trial and, yes, errors, through the decades since the original Apollo missions. The moon gives us many benefits. We can build much larger spacecraft there, and launch them much cheaper per pound than we can on Earth. We can have ground based telescopes there that would rival the clearest and most expensive space telescopes, and would be much easier and cheaper to maintain as well. We would also have the opportunity to see how humanity develops in a completely different gravity from Earth. Would they grow taller and thinner? Would they survive on Earth after a childhood on the moon? All questions that we should already have the answer to. But, not pursuing the moon has left us where we are today. You might ask, how would we pay for all of this? Well, I can name quite a few wars over the past decades that cost many trillions of dollars that cost millions of lives that would have been far better spent on research and development and the betterment of humanity. It's too late now to be complaining about that I guess. All we can do is push forward with what we got. And, your criticisms of the plan are pretty spot on. We need in house development of the technology needed for the missions. We had missions fail in the past because one company used centimeters and another company used inches. When you're sending someone hundreds of thousands of miles away from Earth, you need the damn best guarantees that they are gonna make it back alive. That was part of the problem with the space industry in the last few decades. Several mission failures swayed public opinion away from funding NASA as well as it should have.
    Quote Originally Posted by blobbydan View Post
    We're all doomed. Let these retards shuffle the chairs on the titanic. They can die in a safe space if they want to... Whatever. What a miserable joke this life is. I can't wait until it's all finally over and I can return to the sweet oblivion of the void.

  12. #32
    The Unstoppable Force Skroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    22,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    Landing on the moon is far from pointless. I've always had the opinion that not pushing the moon after landing on it in the first place set our species back technologically decades.
    Nonsense. First, spare me with the "species" talk. The real world is not Star Trek nor an RTS. Secondly space technology alone has advanced leaps and bounds beyond what was flown in the Apollo era.

    That's the ironic part. Apollo era rockets.... good at what they were designed to do.... but not really good to do anything else with.

    Better rockets and better space technology - not to mention the digital revolution, dramatic advances in medicine, and many other technologies - came in the decades after Apollo and had little nothing to do with it at all. And there is no reason to think an expanded space program would have spurred it either.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    We should already have a fully fleshed out moon base, if not a colony. All of this would have been set up through trial and, yes, errors, through the decades since the original Apollo missions.
    There isn't any point of one, either than lunar science and building a big telescope.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    The moon gives us many benefits. We can build much larger spacecraft there, and launch them much cheaper per pound than we can on Earth.
    Old and groundless canard. I'll explain why.

    Space Rockets are made up of millions of parts, from thousands of suppliers across many States in the union and internationally. They rely on factories, machinists specialized towards one part, before they are sent to some location (California, Alabama, Texas, Louisiana or Florida usually) for final assembly.

    If you're going to build rockets on the Moon, you're either relocating the entire industrial base to the Moon - which is impossible (the Moon lacks the raw resources to do that) - or you're talking about shipping the parts to the moon and doing final assembly on the moon. Which means spending energy launch large, finished components off the Earth, sending them to the moon, landing them, then in their final form launching them again. Both would require more than a 'base" or a colony. THey'd require a city or a country, that would be hugely dependent on Earth for fundamental supplies and raw materials to keep making the things their making.

    It's a nonsense proposition unless this colony has many thousands of people, enormous energy production capabilities, and the ability to somehow turn the Moon's accessible raw materials into something useful, like titanium, aluminum and carbon fiber. And put them into useful shapes.

    Now the retort typically given to this is "but 3d printing". It's a bullshit retort. They might as well say "but replicators!". 3D printing isnt anywhere near that level of sophistication yet, and won't be for many, many years. If ever. Secondly scale issues. Thirdly it doesn't change the material needs.

    The superior solution remains constructing large Transiting aircraft in Earth orbit, and utilizing refueling depots, or nuclear propulsion. But turning the moon into a giant factory within a single life time is pure fantasy. After 200 years of infrastructure building? Absolutely. But we're not close to even needing to lay the foundation to that yet.



    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    We can have ground based telescopes there that would rival the clearest and most expensive space telescopes, and would be much easier and cheaper to maintain as well.
    This is true, though not a rationale to do a major lunar mission, especially when the designs for post-JWST space telescopes would ditch both monolithic and segement mirrors for larger, scalable solutions at a fraction of the cost of a large lunar base to support this large lunar telescope.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    We would also have the opportunity to see how humanity develops in a completely different gravity from Earth.
    Would they grow taller and thinner? Would they survive on Earth after a childhood on the moon? All questions that we should already have the answer to.
    First, we have mountains of data about how lower gravity/microgravity environments afflict human beings based on ISS experiments over 20 years. There is not substantial enough need to find that out with regards to the moon, especially since Mars gravity is far greater than the Moons and the data would not be applicable.

    Secondly exposing Children to a colonist life at this point, as part of a science project, would be utterly barbaric. That is not something to "find out".




    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    But, not pursuing the moon has left us where we are today.
    Which is in a pretty goddamn excellent position, as the Space program has better, more economical and more capable rockets than ever before, and we've lived in nothing less than the golden age of planetary exploration... all SINCE Apollo.

    Nearly everything we know about the Solar system and the planets in it has come after 1969.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    You might ask, how would we pay for all of this? Well, I can name quite a few wars over the past decades that cost many trillions of dollars that cost millions of lives that would have been far better spent on research and development and the betterment of humanity.
    Poorly informed utopian nonsense. Earthbound issues effect the lives of billions. I am a space enthusiast and a scientist. But it's all frivolous in the big scheme of things. The US has a Space Program because w'ere large enough AND rich enough to be above to dabble in hobbies. We're not a country that has to look between the seats for change to keep the power turned on. Earthbound issues must always come first because it's fundamentally about how people live. And our global political differences are important for that reason as well. We should not be cooperating with China in space, for example, because what America and China define as human freedom are fundamentally at odds and cannot permanently co-exist. Partnership means legitimization. And we must never legitimize their Earthbound abuses just to facilitate offworld utopian dreams.

    Secondly... "wars". Yeah, wars are nothing on the budget compared to entitlement programs. But that's the way it should be. The first priority of any state should be the welfare and security of its people. Entitlement programs are needed by hundreds of millions of Americans. We should absolutely pay for them in full, unless Americans don't need them anymore for some reason. The essentials have to come before the frivolous.


    Thirdly, most of the big defense contractors are also the big defense space contractors, and defense budgets are the bread and butter of all space companies. SpaceX and ULA are happy to launch the Falcon 9 and Atlas V for NASA. But it is the regular national security launches that pay the bills. SpaceX in particular fought hard to end ULA's monopoly on Air Force launches. The Air Force is subsidizing development of the Raptor engine. And the ULA EELVs (Atlas V, Delta IV) exist only because the government paid for them to exist.

    The SLS above? THe core stage is made by Boeing. The solid rocket boosters by Northrop (who just bought Orbital ATK). The capsule is built by Lockheed Martin. It's a military industrial complex ham sandwich.




    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    It's too late now to be complaining about that I guess. All we can do is push forward with what we got.
    I mean, no offense, but your complaints are a bit... uninformed. Or just seen through the prism of rose colored glasses.

    Take your complaints about the "Wars". If the US didn't go to War after 2001, that defense money would likely have gone... to defense. Why do you think the US has 187 F-22s and not 400? Or 3 DDG-1000s and not 25? Or 1980s-legacy M1A2s (albeit super upgraded) over Future Combat System? Or why there is no "2018 bomber"? It's because the US skipped a planned military upgrade cycle to pay for the wars, and as a result had to stick with the "1980s/1990s" stuff you're probably familiar with - F-15/F-16s, Los Angeles class submarines, B-1 bombers and so forth - over a decade after they were scheduled to be retired.




    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    And, your criticisms of the plan are pretty spot on. We need in house development of the technology needed for the missions.
    This I don't understand at all. NASA needs to be getting out of rocket launching business for good. They need to buy launch services from commercial vendors, and never play a role in building a rocket ever again. Payloads? Transit vehicles? Sure. But NASA has spent close to $20 billion since 2005 on a rocket that will probably launch five times at $1.3 billion per launch, before its rendered obsolete. Rather than just buying flights from SpaceX and co. And why that did not exist as an option in 2005, it does today.




    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    We had missions fail in the past because one company used centimeters and another company used inches.
    You're referring to the Mars Polar Lander or Mars Climate Orbiter. That's not exactly accurate. But there is a good reason for that - institutional knowledge. When you have the same people making vehicles and rockets for decades using the same units their entire careers, randomly swapping to metric incurs risk and means you need to reprogram a lot of software to recognize it, rewrite many manuals and reaffirm many standards. Thats why metrication in the military industrial complex has been slow and been done only by the project.

    I'll offer a sort of aside to this. As the Space Shuttle Main engine was uprated over the years, they didn't redefine the improved thrust as a new "100%". They just started to define it as "105%" and "107%". For the same sort of reason. Shifting an institution's established standards is a non-trivial affair.





    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    When you're sending someone hundreds of thousands of miles away from Earth, you need the damn best guarantees that they are gonna make it back alive. That was part of the problem with the space industry in the last few decades. Several mission failures swayed public opinion away from funding NASA as well as it should have.
    I don't think mission failures have had any effect on long term public opinion. Challenger and Columbia included. Americans as a whole are still hugely supportive of space. Just not at the expense of the bread and butter. And the NASA budget is one of the few agencies of government that has grown, largely uninterrupted, since 2010.

    Money is not an issue at NASA.
    We're Taking Your President Away From You. | Users with <20 posts and ignored posters are invisible. Find out how to do that here and clean up MMO-OT!

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    Landing on the moon is far from pointless. I've always had the opinion that not pushing the moon after landing on it in the first place set our species back technologically decades. We should already have a fully fleshed out moon base, if not a colony. All of this would have been set up through trial and, yes, errors, through the decades since the original Apollo missions. The moon gives us many benefits. We can build much larger spacecraft there, and launch them much cheaper per pound than we can on Earth. We can have ground based telescopes there that would rival the clearest and most expensive space telescopes, and would be much easier and cheaper to maintain as well. We would also have the opportunity to see how humanity develops in a completely different gravity from Earth. Would they grow taller and thinner? Would they survive on Earth after a childhood on the moon? All questions that we should already have the answer to. But, not pursuing the moon has left us where we are today. You might ask, how would we pay for all of this? Well, I can name quite a few wars over the past decades that cost many trillions of dollars that cost millions of lives that would have been far better spent on research and development and the betterment of humanity. It's too late now to be complaining about that I guess. All we can do is push forward with what we got. And, your criticisms of the plan are pretty spot on. We need in house development of the technology needed for the missions. We had missions fail in the past because one company used centimeters and another company used inches. When you're sending someone hundreds of thousands of miles away from Earth, you need the damn best guarantees that they are gonna make it back alive. That was part of the problem with the space industry in the last few decades. Several mission failures swayed public opinion away from funding NASA as well as it should have.
    *sips wine*

    You are aware there are massive ethical considerations involved in asking people to subject themselves to microgravity for possibly their entire remaining lifetimes, right?

    - - - Updated - - -

    I do also want to point out that a lot of this hype and crap for offworld colonization is being driven by billionaire and corporate vanity projects because...well.

    Ever seen the film Elysium? Basically that.

    Delenda Est.

  14. #34
    The Insane PACOX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The Upside Down
    Posts
    19,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Fincayra View Post
    Landing on the moon is far from pointless. I've always had the opinion that not pushing the moon after landing on it in the first place set our species back technologically decades. We should already have a fully fleshed out moon base, if not a colony. All of this would have been set up through trial and, yes, errors, through the decades since the original Apollo missions. The moon gives us many benefits. We can build much larger spacecraft there, and launch them much cheaper per pound than we can on Earth. We can have ground based telescopes there that would rival the clearest and most expensive space telescopes, and would be much easier and cheaper to maintain as well. We would also have the opportunity to see how humanity develops in a completely different gravity from Earth. Would they grow taller and thinner? Would they survive on Earth after a childhood on the moon? All questions that we should already have the answer to. But, not pursuing the moon has left us where we are today. You might ask, how would we pay for all of this? Well, I can name quite a few wars over the past decades that cost many trillions of dollars that cost millions of lives that would have been far better spent on research and development and the betterment of humanity. It's too late now to be complaining about that I guess. All we can do is push forward with what we got. And, your criticisms of the plan are pretty spot on. We need in house development of the technology needed for the missions. We had missions fail in the past because one company used centimeters and another company used inches. When you're sending someone hundreds of thousands of miles away from Earth, you need the damn best guarantees that they are gonna make it back alive. That was part of the problem with the space industry in the last few decades. Several mission failures swayed public opinion away from funding NASA as well as it should have.
    Well, I can name quite a few wars over the past decades that cost many trillions of dollars that cost millions of lives that would have been far better spent on research and development and the betterment of humanity.
    For sure but it war and the threat of war that got us into space in the first place. The first rockets were basically modified ballistic missiles. The Space Race was due to the US and USSR not want the other to gain upper hand.

    When we first went to the moon we took a lot of shortcuts. The bare minimum was done to get to the moon and back safely. We didn't know much about living and surviving in space. We didn't really care about the economics of getting there as long as we beat the Soviets. There weren't any concrete long term goals, just beat the Russians. Its as we didn't know how to swim but jump in the deep end and back out to say we reached the deepest part of the pool before our brother. Technically yes, but we still don't know to swim.

    After the moon landings, we found out that the moon was kind of useless and we didn't know much about working in space. Robots are better scientific explorers than humans while LEO and Earth were better for low gravity science labs. That why time afterward was spent learning how to remain in space longer and the impacts on the body. How to build extended duration habitats, get up there more efficiently/safely, etc.

    You speak of satellites. We had to learn how to build them in LEO first, Hubble.

    We can have ground-based telescopes there that would rival the clearest and most expensive space telescopes,
    We have those on Earth already. We even have a radio telescope that 'the size of Earth'. That's how they took an image of a black hole a few months back.

    Building a large spacecraft? ISS. Before that, we had to learn how to build smaller structures, Mir, Spacelab, etc.

  15. #35
    USA Today published a special edition newspaper about the 2024 NASA moon mission. Its $4.95 and 87 pages, filled with articles, pictures and art. I just happened to notice it at a 7-11 today. I picked one up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kokolums View Post
    I want the ruins of K'aresh for 9.0 as I envision it as Netherstorm on steroids. A broken, shattered world. Eco-domes are stuck on various chunks to protect flora & fauna. I imagine a K'aresh ocean & maybe some islands contained in an eco dome or a snow-capped peak with some jungle valleys in another. Flesh version of Ethereals that never got altered. Space platforms as in Starcraft. Just a totally fantastic tileset & theme that I'd be very keen to explore. They could do some wild things.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Kokolums View Post
    USA Today published a special edition newspaper about the 2024 NASA moon mission. Its $4.95 and 87 pages, filled with articles, pictures and art. I just happened to notice it at a 7-11 today. I picked one up.
    Yes, and I'm sure they'll be as relevant in 2024 as all those Times articles about how Constellation was going to be the next Apollo program are in 2019.

    Delenda Est.

  17. #37
    Immortal Beazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,880
    What are we going back to the moon for?

    Is there like 23 trillion tons of oil or gold stored there?

    Honest question. I love space, but going back to the moon to plant another flag seems like a waste of a few hundred billion dollars.

  18. #38
    Warchief
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    2,041
    In general having a base on the moon to launch missions from is considered a major step in exploring the solar system as its easier to launch from the moon then earth (once everything is setup and ready). In the timeline at the start of this thread it even stated the Mars launches will come happen from the Moon. On top of that we've not been there in a fairly long time so its a good test if nothing else. Also isn't NASA budget like 20 billion a year? A most this could cost around 100 billion which is less then a "few" and this also wouldn't take up 100% of their budget

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •