Re: Space exploration for the rest of us


"Frank Glover" <starr176@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:sBkUg.56993$uH6.28202@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


That's why I consider cheaper access to LEO the first step in doing
*anything* (It's not been described as 'Halfway to Anywhere' for
nothing) in space. (And it's a large part of what *I* don't like about
the proposed archetecture. It gets us to the Moon, but without something
that does what the shuttle was *supposed* to do.)


I agree completely, it's why I like Space Solar Power as a long term goal.
As cheap launch costs would be a prerequisite to making SSP
work. And cheap access would allow just about any future goal
manned or not, possible.






Because we can find out what we need or want to know from
robotic missions quickly and cheaply compared to manned
missions. I want to know all about mars, why in the flippin
world would I prefer to wait forty, or more likey sixty, years for a
manned mission to mars when the next gen rovers could tell me
just as much, I'll give you almost as much, in less than.........five
years.


A: You can't know that it would take five years (how long have we
been sending probes there already?). and largely because of...

B: Who can possibly know how long it wil take to know 'all about'
Mars (or any other celestial object of interest), no matter how many
robots or humans go there. We can't even say that about Earth, yet.



Well the data from Mars is flooding in now. You do know that
they've found the water on Mars didn't evaporate into space.
But it went underground. And melts out from time to time
probably as ice ages wax and wane. All those sedimentary
rock formations at Meridiani were repeatedly soaked.
And even more important, since water would melt
out from underground, the craters and such would
become ice capped lakes.

As the water can be replenished from underground
faster than the ice would ablate away. So water on the
surface of Mars can exist with the current atmosphere.





"Oh but a human could move around the surface faster and
make better decision"

Pahlease, the can't if they're not on the surface for another
flippin fifty or sixty years ....now can they?


That it would take that long is *your* assumption. Not mine (and
I've said why), nor is it that of many others on this newsgroup.


The polls are clear, the taxpayers don't support manned missions
to the moon and mars. And for a long term program that's the
kiss of death. And even Nasa mentions forty years for Mars.
Which would be the best case imo. Just a couple of months
ago legislation was introduced in the House to strip
funding for moon missions. It got over 160 votes in
a republican dominated Congress. If the democrats
win back the House you can kiss the moon mission
goodbye.

Lockheed and others have strong-armed the moon mission
into existence. It won't last as it fails to inspire public
support. SSP would however, and lots of support.
Which would give Nasa the kind of resources it needs
to make cheap access a reality.

If you care about Nasa and space travel, you have to
care what John Q citizen thinks and wants.

Since when has Bush cared about anyone but his
own opinion???


Jonathan

s









--

Frank

You know what to remove to reply...

Check out my web page: http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm

"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the
human spirit."
- Stephen Hawking

.

Relevant Pages

  • Debate raging where to go next
    ... My guess is that if no water is found on the Moon, ... rockets don't require much ejection mass and the benefit of creating ... dangerously long missions. ... The problem with Mars is that going there will be hugely expensive. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Debate raging where to go next
    ... My guess is that if no water is found on the Moon, the U.S. will still return there but only for a brief period of time. ... The real benefit would be small since nuclear rockets don't require much ejection mass and the benefit of creating liquid hydrogen and oxygen from Moon-water would be small. ... And I'm convinced NASA will start developing nuclear rockets for a trip to Mars. ... Therefore people who are now calling for missions to Mars should be carefull what they wish for since if they succeed in killing the Constellation program we might well end up going nowhere at all! ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Is it this easy to live on Mars?
    ... energy a person needs on Mars. ... I said it would take about 165 watts ... you also have water. ... A crew of 30 requires 39.6 tonnes of consumables to be carried along ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: The Dangerous Liberty of Engineering vs. Lukewarm Dominionism
    ... where the water is. ... for any future endeavors we make on Mars. ... terstellar economy. ... An engineer should not attempt to maliciously injure the profes- ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • More on "Frost on the rover solar panels".
    ... water/ice is deposited near the equator seasonally on Mars: ... 47 - EVIDENCE OF THE SEASONAL REDISTRIBUTION OF WATER IN THE SURFICIAL ... this may explain how could experience deposition during this period ... > south of the equator, plus low temperatures near the surface, ...
    (sci.astro)
Loading