ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Mars

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Sep. 13 2010, 5:25 am

No matter the destination, we need to follow a basic principle from von braun's playbook. The first thing we need is a massive orbital station to construct ships and launch expeditions from. The ISS doesn't cut it. Once we have a station like von braun designed and was featured in 2001, exploration becomes more sustainable.

What's the first thing explorers did when landing in a new frontier? Establish a base or fort to send expeditions from. We have yet to get through this basic step. We barely have a foothold in space and need the kind of station envisioned when the shuttle was conceived.

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Sep. 13 2010, 7:24 am

As NASA argues, going to Mars will make what was spent going to the Moon a good investment. That's a clever way of endlessly spending money without ever producing anything.

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Sep. 13 2010, 7:24 am

Damn annoying duplicate posts!
Anyway, I agree with the above,
Matthias Russell. And NASA is still
living in the 60's, as its scrapped
ORION program demonstrates.


Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Sep. 13 2010, 11:03 am

Space funding will never match early 60s levels until the public feels threatened. The chinese have made it clear they plan to have a man on the moon by 2020. Once they have overtaken america in economic status and have gotten to the moon, the wind-driven electorate will wake up and demand a higher space budget. 4 years later they won't care. Then no one will care again until the ecosystem faces a major threat. Unfortunately, we live in a reactionary society, mainstream desire to better ourselves died in world war 1.

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Sep. 15 2010, 10:48 am

Well roger, speculation is free. Of course, go to a cow pasture and there a large chunks of 'free' all over the ground.

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Sep. 15 2010, 3:10 pm

These pet theories they use to suck up grant money
really drives me nuts, because people get suckered
by it. It appears that life will naturally occur
wherever the conditions allow for it. While Mars was
indeed wet, for a time, many conditions seem not to
have been met. Earth had it all going for it, there
without need for all of these half-assed "extreme"
microbe theories. And nowhere astronauts go to look
on Mars will be adequate in this money-pit quest of
theirs. "Oh, darn! We must not have looked in the right
place, we didn't find anything! We're going to have to
go back!". NASA makes me sick, sometimes ... Seriously.

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Sep. 17 2010, 9:40 am

Don't blame the engineers and most of the scientists, blame the politicians in charge.

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Sep. 22 2010, 8:41 am

Engineers and Scientists generally have a lot
of "book smarts," but tend to be amongst the
most gullible of people. And there is plenty
of blame to go around, when it comes to their
wasting taxpayer money on Feel-Good Missions,
like Apollo's 12 through 17.

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Sep. 22 2010, 8:41 am

Engineers and Scientists generally have a lot
of "book smarts," but tend to be amongst the
most gullible of people. And there is plenty
of blame to go around, when it comes to their
wasting taxpayer money on Feel-Good Missions,
like Apollo's 12 through 17.

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Sep. 22 2010, 11:56 am

Quote: 2takesfrakes @ Sep. 22 2010, 8:41 am

Engineers and Scientists generally have a lot of "book smarts," but tend to be amongst the most gullible of people. And there is plenty of blame to go around, when it comes to their wasting taxpayer money on Feel-Good Missions, like Apollo's 12 through 17.

12-17 were far from feel good missions, each built upon the lessons of the one before and would have led to a valuable exploration structure if the program were not canceled. 15-17 in particular were packed with valuable science. Apollo-soyuz, that was a feel good mission.

ivyduhart

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3

Report this Sep. 29 2010, 12:41 pm

I understand the frustration we have within todays outlook. We thought, at this time, we should physically exploring our solar system, and looking at Mars and our Moon more closely like how they brought it out in "Enterprise". In the book I created, "Star Depth", I explained how our space program began, and the exploration of both Mars, and the Moon. If you all get a chance, take a look at my book and judge for yourself if I had the right idea's as Gene Roddenberry had.

miklamar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2170

Report this Nov. 27 2010, 9:17 pm

dryson, that is awesome! You should be an Admiral in Starfleet Engineering or a Professor at the Daystrom Institute!
Plus, Mars would probably be a popular stopover, both before and after crossing through the asteroid belt. Your plan, dryson, would provide plenty of room for visitors and vacationers, as well as for people working and living there.

Var Miklama--Zakdorn, engineer. "A sound mind in a FULL body!" "Time, like latinum, is a limited quantity in the galaxy."

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: alfamav

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum