Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
Everyone seriously interested in the Space program and exploration of our Solar System should read The Case for Mars; The Plan to Settle the Red Planet and Why We Must. By Robert Zubrin and Richard Wagner
This work points out why the "traditional NASA approach" was so expensive as to become totally unaffordable. The authors, ex-Lockheed-Martin engineers offer a completely rational approach to accomplish manned travel to Mars within a 10 year window. They point out the logistical nightmare encompassed by the NASA "German Plan," as originally conceived by Wehrner von Braun and publishe in Collier's magazine in 1953.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 8, 2011 - 10:35pm PT
|
BDC, hmmm, that's interesting.
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
Dingus; I would have to agree with your assessment of the ISS being a colossal waste of money that otherwise could have been used on more productive space projects. However, the ISS was the rationale behind the Space Shuttle. The most productive thing the shuttle program ever did was repair and maintain the Hubble Space Telescope.
|
|
BASE104
climber
An Oil Field
|
|
I was joking about shutting down NASA to build aircraft carriers.
I actually collect some types of space artifacts. I am a space nut.
NASA's problem is that there is no clear objective to manned spaceflight. The shuttle went way over budget and couldn't come close to the promised launch schedule. It was also limited on orbital altitude.
The Defense Dept quit using the shuttle pretty quickly. They do most of it out of Vandenburg.
If you want to see a gigantic space budget, look at the NRO. They do all of the spy satellites. Unreal amount of money, much of it hidden in black budget items.
|
|
nature
climber
Aridzona for now Denver.... here I come...
|
|
I was joking about shutting down NASA to build aircraft carriers.
No? Really?!?!?!?!1111169
oh the irony!
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 8, 2011 - 10:51pm PT
|
You ISS deniers lose sight of the bigger picture. Do I have to spell it out?
It was a step into space to conduct experiments for future projects. Maybe defense projects too..hehe!
|
|
laughingman
Mountain climber
Seattle WA
|
|
For those of you who think I am a hater I am all for manned spaceflight
If they need a stopgap way to get to space at the moment why not modify the specs of the old titan rockets with a modern reentry pod?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 8, 2011 - 10:57pm PT
|
If they need a stopgap way to get to space at the moment why not modify the specs of the old titan rockets with a modern reentry pod?
The way I see it, new missions also need moderate/heavy payload capacity too.
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
Bluey-
The rationale for the Zubrin book is what has come to be called "Mars Direct" by it's supporters.
From the book:
It is the richness of Mars that makes the Red Planet not only desirable, but attainable.
The idea is: instead of hauling everything needed for the return flight and survival on the planet along in massive "Battlestar Galactica" size space ships, utilization of the existing planetary resources may be utilized to make the trip far less expensive and more logistically possible. The author constructed a methane generator for Lockheed-Martin for a budget of $45,000.00 that took the components readily available on the Red Planet (carbon dioxide and water) and produced liquid methane which could be used as fuel for a return flight. Electrolysis of water, found as ice on Mars also can be a source of liquid oxygen as well as providing hydrogen to the methane generator, as well as providing breathable air. The author proposes sending ship #1 in advance of a manned mission which robotically begins producing fuels for a return flight. When sufficient fuel has been stockpiled, ship #2, manned takes off. Meanwhile, while the original crew is exploring/doing science, additional fuel is manufactured for ship #3, the relief crew for the manned base for exploration. The estimate is a $10 billion per year for 10 years will get man on the surface of the Red Planet by 2025.
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
There are no more "old Titan rockets" available; they all got used up. They were real cheap to launch, according to my ex-Lockheed-Martin engineer friend, at $50 million per launch. A Space Shuttle flight was 10 times that cost per mission.
|
|
laughingman
Mountain climber
Seattle WA
|
|
Original goals of the Shuttle included operating at a fairly high flight rate (roughly 12 flights per year, at low cost, and with high reliability. Improving in these areas over the previous generation of single-use and unmanned launchers was a motivation. Although it did operate as the world's first reusable crew-carrying spacecraft, it did not greatly improve on those parameters, and is considered by some to have failed in its original purpose.
Decent article on the subject...
http://www.century-of-flight.net/Aviation%20history/space/Space%20Shuttle%20history.htm
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 8, 2011 - 11:11pm PT
|
I hear ya BDC, but isn't that what the rovers were doing up there? Looking for sites?
As I said before, NASA works methodically with a big vision. Look at VOyager.
I like the idea your authors laid out, and that's probably how it will go down. If we can land 2 rovers in balloon balls and then conduct missions, we can certainly progress greatlt from there.
We have (NASA has) learned a lot!!! And that is my over-arching point, man!!!!!!
NASA gathers data, usually safely, and builds on it progressively.
It's quite awesome to behold through it's history.
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
I am very interested in knowing whether we are "alone in the universe," as a life form. I seriously doubt we are, and in fact I'm pretty well convinced of "panspermia." I'm also adventuresome enough to want to "go exploring." Why did all the Polar expeditions take place? There certainly weren't any resources to exploit.
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
Bluey-
Originally, the rovers were on a mission to find evidence of water. I went to a talk at the Central Wyoming Astronomical Society 5 years ago to hear a talk by Dr. Jim Rice, one of the rover operators at Arizona State University. It was way cool presentation, by the way. He had taken a years photos of Opportunity circumnavigating the Victoria crater and made an animated "grand tour." It was only 45 seconds long, but wowwed the sox off me. Anyway, he showed lots of slides showing sedimentary rock formations, since he calls himself an "astrogeologist." The evidence was pretty convincing that liquid water was present in the distant past.
I've been a serious amateur astronomer for a long time, as well as a climber. Yes. I have my own observatory.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 8, 2011 - 11:26pm PT
|
BDC and LM, I hera ya. It's a lot of cash. But compared to what?
We just spent 800 Billion on nonsense. Relatively speaking, NASA is not that expensive, and DOES deliver usable returns.
Dingus, why should we do this? Because you have no immagination and no curiosity. Others do. There is stuff to be learned out there.
Of course you'd rather dump more money from NASA down the rat-hole of Education, Green Energy, less-military, et. al., you fail to have the vision of what technology can be had through NASA programs.
EDIT:
But to go to another planet with the plan of consuming its resources like this, off world as it were?
Do you eat food? Drive a car?, Use a computer?
Do you CONSUME RESOURCES????
|
|
laughingman
Mountain climber
Seattle WA
|
|
I've been a serious amateur astronomer for a long time, as well as a climber. Yes. I have my own observatory.
I live in seattle and yes it is cloudy 8 months of the year...
No use in having your own observatory up here...
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 8, 2011 - 11:35pm PT
|
BDC, the rover missions were utter success stories. They found traces of ice/water under the soil. As for Dingus' theory that we're raping a planet I am not convinced.
I have read Ray Bradbury/Robert Heinlein though...cool reads BTW.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
Broken down climber....We are not alone in this universe...Have you ever met an Alien named Cosmic...? RJ
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
Dingus-
I don't think we are planning to exploit Mars in a rapacious manner. I consider it as "stopping by an island to get water and supplies" on mankind's voyage of exploration of our universe. I can see exploiting the asteroid belt for strategic minerals, such as iron and nickel.
Coming back to "panspermia" for a moment; I had another discussion with an astronomy prof from one of the SUNY campuses at the Astronomy club. He was presenting some spectroscopic evidence from a comet fly-by which indicated presence of Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) on their surfaces. I thought it was some strong evidence of life forms since PAHs can be formed from long-chain fatty acids by ring closure. Comets also contain nickel and some iron, in addition to the primary material which is water. Nickel and iron are both catalysts for a multitude of organic chemistry reactions.
Although my degree is in Physical Chemistry, most of my career was spent doing bioorganic chemistry, and working with amino acids and peptides.
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
RJ-
Yep. I happen to know Cosmic; we have plans to go climbing together...sometime...somewhere.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!