Star Trek NASA

NASA

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Jan. 31 2011, 11:43 am

The crew was alive until impact. It is in the accident report. The Gs of the explosion were enough to maybe render the crew unconscious but the cabin structure was intact until ocean impact which was enough to kill the crew. It was concluded that was the moment of death.

For Columbia, the crew was killed by impact trauma while the ship broke apart but they were unconscious because the initial cabin breach sucked the air or of their lungs.

In both cases, the crew was aware they were going to die, but probably didn't have time to think about it or respond before being rendered unconscious. It isn't believed they suffered.

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Feb. 01 2011, 3:48 am

The thing to remember, especially in the case of columbia, is the break up happened in a few seconds. When you read the reports, they detail a long chain of events but in real time they happened quickly so from the crew's standpoint there was no suffering and minimal awareness. To me, that isn't a "terrible"way to go. Apollo 1 was the terrible ordeal but I don't want to get into the details, but even then, the event was over extremely quickly.

miklamar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1757

Report this Feb. 02 2011, 7:51 pm

Consider all the casualties and deaths that occurred with every travel-related invention, such as the automobile and the airplane. Although tragedies have occurred with the space program, mankind will never advance beyond our current level unless we can overcome the difficulties of space travel. I think that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

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

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3462

Report this Feb. 03 2011, 8:52 pm

People can't live on the surface of the rocky
planets, like they do here. It would make much
more sense to find ways to live on, or in, the
ocean. Perhaps, make the deserts of Earth thrive.

What our Solar System DOES offer is raw materials,
rather than living room - especially metals, which
we desperately need. But that's about the extent of
"the needs of the many" that near space can remedy.

The 60's weren't necessarily backwards, but there were
incredible opportunities for advancement. Just 20 years
before, trains were run off coal. The Moon Race sparked
new technologies in all areas, and changed the world. It
no longer relies on NASA to progress, technologically.

miklamar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1757

Report this Feb. 03 2011, 8:58 pm

Quote: 2takesfrakes @ Feb. 03 2011, 8:52 pm

>People can't live on the surface of the rocky planets, like they do here. It would make much more sense to find ways to live on, or in, the ocean. Perhaps, make the deserts of Earth thrive. What our Solar System DOES offer is raw materials, rather than living room - especially metals, which we desperately need. But that's about the extent of "the needs of the many" that near space can remedy. The 60's weren't necessarily backwards, but there were incredible opportunities for advancement. Just 20 years before, trains were run off coal. The Moon Race sparked new technologies in all areas, and changed the world. It no longer relies on NASA to progress, technologically.

We wouldn't have to live on a rocky planet's surface; we could live below the surface in a kind of earth-home (but on that other planet!). As you said, oceans would also be good places, like in Stargate: Atlantis.

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

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3462

Report this Feb. 03 2011, 9:17 pm

Nobody would want to live like a coal-miner,
or raise families in that kind of environment.
The best thing would be to make the deserts of
Earth livable. Living underground would rock for
a researcher, but it's not a place to raise a family.

SDK

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 35

Report this Feb. 03 2011, 9:53 pm

If they found oil on the moon, Nasa's funding would get a considerable boost. Then environmentalists and progressives will facepalm.

miklamar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1757

Report this Feb. 03 2011, 10:08 pm

Quote: 2takesfrakes @ Feb. 03 2011, 9:17 pm

Nobody would want to live like a coal-miner, or raise families in that kind of environment. The best thing would be to make the deserts of Earth livable. Living underground would rock for a researcher, but it's not a place to raise a family.

Not all underground dwellings are dark like a coal mine. Here are some examples of pleasant underground homes:
http://www.underground-homes.com/
If they could have a light well, they would seem like homes on the surface.

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

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3462

Report this Feb. 04 2011, 5:56 am

Quote: SDK @ Feb. 03 2011, 9:53 pm

If they found oil on the moon, Nasa's funding would get a considerable boost. Then environmentalists and progressives will facepalm.

As the name implies, Fossil Fuels (like oil),
mean life creates it. One-celled creatures,
known as diatoms, to be exact.

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3462

Report this Feb. 04 2011, 6:02 am

Quote: miklamar @ Feb. 03 2011, 10:08 pm

Quote: 2takesfrakes @ Feb. 03 2011, 9:17 pm

Nobody would want to live like a coal-miner, or raise families in that kind of environment. The best thing would be to make the deserts of Earth livable. Living underground would rock for a researcher, but it's not a place to raise a family.

Not all underground dwellings are dark like a coal mine. Here are some examples of pleasant underground homes: http://www.underground-homes.com/ If they could have a light well, they would seem like homes on the surface.

You know how wymin are, deciding what
to wear as it is, can you imagine having
to spend 2 hours to get dressed in a space
suit, just to spend time outside? That's all
you could have on the Moon or Mars. Even a
comfortable prison is still a prison and it
would eventually feel that way. We belong to,
with and in the outdoors, wild and free. Some
may not mind living like a mole rat. Most would.

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Feb. 04 2011, 6:56 am

I agree with 2takes that inhabiting other worlds in our system its pointless. Small mining colonies is the only use for the other planets once we can slim the commute time. However, I am a believer in establishing a lunar colony not just for the resources but because the dark side of the moon is an excellent place for telescopes and solar observation. Such telescopes would be easier to maintain on a planetoid surface and not be affected by earth shine. Also, it would be a good place for testing extra solar colonization concepts.