It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why We Should Consider a Mission to 550 AU From Sol

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




NASA seem act like a child with ADD, no long term plans just flitering from one half finnished project to another without getting little to anything done and wasting a # ton of money.

NASA has big dreams with no budget to back it up.
They consistently under estimate project costs.
Congress has finally caught on.
Plus most of their missions have very little benefit to the country overall.

How did Hubble benefit 350 million Americans?
Pretty pictures?
This 550AU mission is not going anywhere.




posted on Apr, 21 2015 @ 12:11 AM
link   
there is some really interesting stuff coming out of eagle works via Paul March (one of the eagleworks engineers working directly for Dr White.) It's almost like their head shed said screw the NDA!) Stuff about the EM drive and stuff about the warp experiments. data slides, answered questions from skeptical scientists and engineers, abstracts of papers that haven't even been put on the server yet, design details of the test articles, of the power equipment, resonant frequencies, controls for thermal and other spurious sources of false positives. test run data from the warp interferometry that shows the warp signature above sigma. lots and lots going on!

even that silly looking EM drive thing could send something to 550 AU in just a few months to a year if DR white's calculations and projections are correct.



posted on Apr, 21 2015 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: eriktheawful
Out that far, data sent would take 76 hours or 3 days to get to us, and of course any instructions we send to it would take that same amount of time.

Right now, New Horizons that's on it's way and almost at Pluto is the fastest space craft, traveling at 36,373 Mph. At that speed, it would take 160 years to get to 550 AU, so we would certainly need a faster means of travel to get there in a more reasonable amount of time.


We already have faster means at least on paper. We just haven't built it yet.




Thats the problem, they are on paper.


Plans, projects and propulsion dont do anything stitting on paper.


NASA seem act like a child with ADD, no long term plans just flitering from one half finnished project to another without getting little to anything done and wasting a # ton of money.

Pick some projects and stick with them.


Um... hello.... 18 billion dollars is not a "# ton of money" in the context of the ideas of stuff you want them to do below...

Have you read this report?



Enduring Visions, Daring Quests: NASA Astrophysics in the Next Three Decades - FULL PDF for Download

I've posted these excerpts on more than one occasion elsewhere on ATS. Guessed you missed them.....








Get a man on mars,


$50 billion - Join Penny 4 NASA yet?




get a replacement for keppler


Already done and will be launched in 2017 and ttp://wfirst.gsfc.nasa.gov/]done and will be launched in 2022 And get this... they're not just replacements, upgrades.




and develop a next generation of propulsion.



Working on it....




Clearly we've established a few things about you: 1) You are woefully unaware of what is going on in space technology and at NASA, 2) You have no idea how much things cost. 3) You're spelling is suspect.

When you can rectify those things your opinion in these matters may carry a lot more weight.
edit on 21-4-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2015 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

Jade number 3 of your critique made coffee come out of my nostrils. Well done



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

1) there is no need to be rude
2) I have been all for increased spending on NASA. You know full well im 100% space exploration.
3) Not everyone types well on a touch pad screen.

Your "established" theory's of me are false. I'm just extremely skeptical of the politicians bureaucracy's surrounding NASA not the people in it and I honestly thought you knew me far better than that



You know full well all though NASA may have a long term plan politicians don't and they could can very well well throw a spanner in the works at any moment, which is the point im getting at.
edit on 22-4-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-4-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 06:09 PM
link   
hmmmmm. you know most NASA boondoggles do not originate in NASA but in either congress or the executive branch. The Space station that eventually became known as the ISS is one such example. Not the station itself. but its funding history. It was redesigned three times each time obstensively to save money but each redesign caused it to cost more that its previous conception without adding new capabilities to it for the extra money. In fact; capabilities were stripped from it. remember; it was supposed to be a way station for a manned Mars mission at first. Back when it was space station Freedom instead of I.S.S.


Crowd funding and crowd sourcing are new innovations.

Which NASA cannot use due to regulations and laws intended to prevent ethical impropriety or the appearance there of in an age before these new possibilities existed.

The Eagle Works engineer had to turn down offers of volunteer work from qualified volunteers as well as donations of equipment or raw materials because of such rules. Also he said that crowd funding was not allowed either.

With the advent of crowd funding perhaps those rules need to be reworked. And Perhaps NASA could have special earmarked "war Bonds" or savings bonds that were not in a general U.S. govt fund but only goes to fund NASA. This is in addition to the standard budgetary allocation to NASA not in place of it.

[There should be an electric fence, a moat filled with hungry pirhanas and gators, and guards armed with cattle prods, tasers, mace and rolled up newspapers to keep congress critters and exec agencies out of it ]

Also NASA should be able to advertise and advocate for crowd funding campaigns.
edit on 22-4-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 07:27 PM
link   
guys, guys.... no need to argue, we live on a planet full of idiots.

This is from Mother Jones as good a source as any I believe.


Other reports have estimated the cost of US wars since 9/11 to be far higher than $1.6 trillion. A report by Neta Crawford, a political science professor at Boston University, estimated the total cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—as well as post-2001 assistance to Pakistan—to be roughly $4.4 trillion. The CRS estimate is lower because it does not include additional costs including the lifetime price of health care for disabled veterans and interest on the national debt.


17 Billion?

We spent 4.4 Trillion or will with health care and stuff in a little over a decade... For Iraq and Afghanistan? We don't even get to keep those places or the resources lol, it's like a comedy of errors...

550 AU?

I say Pthhhhhhh, of course we can do it if we put our minds to it, our ridiculous 4.4 Trillion wasn't even a global effort it was just the USA rofl....

My guesstimate is we could have colonized Mars for that and that's a Planet, there is debate there might be habitable planets in the Centauri system right next door....

Our argument here certainly isn't "CAN" we do it, it's "How" do we get people to get their damn priorities straight and "git er done"



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: criticalhit




Our argument here certainly isn't "CAN" we do it, it's "How" do we get people to get their damn priorities straight and "git er done"

Since I'm knocking at the door of 60 my priorities are leaning toward SSI and medicare.
This 550AU mission would not benefit me in the slightest.
The baby boomers want their SSI more than another show off space mission.
Space missions provide very few jobs. Now a good war, that's another matter.



posted on Apr, 22 2015 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

Heh

That's exactly what i'm talking about.. "getting our priorities straight"

Things like, giving a damn about the future of your species, your children or your families children... or hell anyone's children.

I'd live without some extras in the years headed to death for that...

And lol, not much money goes to the public anyway, meaningless to cut it...



posted on Apr, 23 2015 @ 07:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: JadeStar

1) there is no need to be rude
2) I have been all for increased spending on NASA. You know full well im 100% space exploration.
3) Not everyone types well on a touch pad screen.

Your "established" theory's of me are false. I'm just extremely skeptical of the politicians bureaucracy's surrounding NASA not the people in it and I honestly thought you knew me far better than that



You know full well all though NASA may have a long term plan politicians don't and they could can very well well throw a spanner in the works at any moment, which is the point im getting at.


I'd like to apologize then. I remember you now. I guess I got so used to the ewok avatar I thought you were someone else. Your post though seemed way out of character compared to the great conversations we've had here over the years.

Stormbringer brings up a great point. Most of NASA's "Ready Aim, Aim" syndrome is not due to NASA itself it's due to the way funding for it is set up and subject to the whim of congress and the executive branch.

It is as maddening for scientists as it is for the general public.



posted on Apr, 23 2015 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: criticalhit




Our argument here certainly isn't "CAN" we do it, it's "How" do we get people to get their damn priorities straight and "git er done"

Since I'm knocking at the door of 60 my priorities are leaning toward SSI and medicare.
This 550AU mission would not benefit me in the slightest.
The baby boomers want their SSI more than another show off space mission.
Space missions provide very few jobs. Now a good war, that's another matter.


Forget SSI. How about the defense budget? It's ludicrously high funding weapons systems that are either obsolete, soon to be obsolete or which are unwanted by the branch of service they're made for.

It should never be "Space or the social safety net" it should always be "Space or another B2 bomber"....
edit on 23-4-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 12:38 AM
link   
a 4 newton EM drive can make alpha proxima in 29 years. and that is assuming proper acceleration and deacceleration times via the copernicus flight trajectory calculator. current EM output is .1 newton. planned new test articles will up that output.
edit on 24-4-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 05:07 AM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

No worries misunderstandings happen and that is exactly the point I was getting at.

I have full confidence and respect for all those working at NASA.

I cant say the same for the politicians who control your budgets and aims...

All it takes is President "I need more money to bomb Iran" or Congressman "I think science is the devil" for a project to get canned or delayed and lets not get into the pork barrel projects that have wasted millions.

I remember when Bush announced the constellation program (one of the few useful things he ever did) then watched Obama gut it. so I am very wary of what your politicians will do next.

Hell I am scared for the James Webb telescope still! Even though its all but complete I am petrified some monkey in a suite sitting in capital hill will can it.

NASA has my full support as it inspired me in the 90's to go into Science (Though Biology). It is why it really hurts me every time a politicians does something stupid or wastes your very sparse budget.
edit on 24-4-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 05:19 AM
link   
Interesting Article

cosmosmagazine.com...

It's talking about perhaps thousands of small worlds and even 2 "Super Earths (size wise)" beyond Pluto

There are several main points here in this thread including the premise.

1: Reaching 550 AU

2: Increasing speed to make it more plausible

3: Humans living within planetesimals

4: And my own line of thought which is "there is a lot, a lot of stuff on the way to 550 AU"

My point is these are all integrated concepts and all correct to one degree or another. The push to 550 AU and beyond is a definitive it's going to take all of these things, large space station, Moon base, asteroid mining, bases on Planetesimals within the Kuiper belt, fueling stations in the Oort cloud and so on.

There is no singular leap to it, but the path is very clear and very attainable.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 05:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
a 4 newton EM drive can make alpha proxima in 29 years. and that is assuming proper acceleration and deacceleration times via the copernicus flight trajectory calculator. current EM output is .1 newton. planned new test articles will up that output.


Thats IF the EM drives works


The jury is still out.

Though it does look promising.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: criticalhit

Sorry but I don't agree you need space station or moon-base, asteroid mining etc to go out that far.

A singular leap in the field of power generation is all that's needed.

Imagine the Lockheed Martin 100mw Fusion reactor that's the size of a small car. Combine this with VASIMR & you have the means to traverse the solar system & beyond in one fell swoop.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: big_BHOY
a reply to: criticalhit

Sorry but I don't agree you need space station or moon-base, asteroid mining etc to go out that far.

A singular leap in the field of power generation is all that's needed.

Imagine the Lockheed Martin 100mw Fusion reactor that's the size of a small car. Combine this with VASIMR & you have the means to traverse the solar system & beyond in one fell swoop.


And how do you get that VASIMR engine attached to a Fusion reactor into orbit?


Earth to orbit cost and safety is one of the biggest hurdles we need to overcome.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
a 4 newton EM drive can make alpha proxima in 29 years. and that is assuming proper acceleration and deacceleration times via the copernicus flight trajectory calculator. current EM output is .1 newton. planned new test articles will up that output.


Thats IF the EM drives works


The jury is still out.

Though it does look promising.
I've concluded personally that the EM drive(s) work. but let us say they don't. Modern ion drive technology can go just as fast.

edit on 24-4-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: big_BHOY
a reply to: criticalhit

Sorry but I don't agree you need space station or moon-base, asteroid mining etc to go out that far.

A singular leap in the field of power generation is all that's needed.

Imagine the Lockheed Martin 100mw Fusion reactor that's the size of a small car. Combine this with VASIMR & you have the means to traverse the solar system & beyond in one fell swoop.


And how do you get that VASIMR engine attached to a Fusion reactor into orbit?


Earth to orbit cost and safety is one of the biggest hurdles we need to overcome.
There is not special safety concern for a fusion reactor getting to orbit. there is no nukey poo in a fusion reactor. no radioisotopes. no radiation at all until you turn it on. even if you turn it on it is not a permanent radiation hazzard. and if it did blow up while activated on the way to orbit the stuff that comes out would go poof in a few minutes. There is far more dangerous stuff in your typical smoke detector.
edit on 24-4-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-4-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: big_BHOY
a reply to: criticalhit

Sorry but I don't agree you need space station or moon-base, asteroid mining etc to go out that far.

A singular leap in the field of power generation is all that's needed.

Imagine the Lockheed Martin 100mw Fusion reactor that's the size of a small car. Combine this with VASIMR & you have the means to traverse the solar system & beyond in one fell swoop.


And how do you get that VASIMR engine attached to a Fusion reactor into orbit?


Earth to orbit cost and safety is one of the biggest hurdles we need to overcome.
There is not special safety concern for a fusion reactor getting to orbit. there is no nukey poo in a fusion reactor. no radioisotopes. no radiation at all until you turn it on. even if you turn it on it is not a permanent radiation hazzard. and if it did blow up while activated on the way to orbit the stuff that comes out would go poof in a few minutes. There is far more dangerous stuff in your typical smoke detector.


That's not the safety I was talking about. I know full well how fusion works and how it wont cause fallout. Hell I am a project Orion fan for crying out loud! So I am far from concerned with nuclear safety hehe

The safety I am talking about is the big crude EXPENSIVE dumb rocket that relies on a big crude dumb explosion that compared to most modes of transport have a pretty bad reliability rate.

Every time you spend tens or hundreds of million to get a object into space you stand a chance of losing it in a launch failure and worse if what you send up is crewed!

And there is the fact you have to spend tens or hundreds of millions in the first place to get something actually into orbit

edit on 24-4-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-4-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join