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.
originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: intrptr
Watch some of the Apollo videos, you'll see when they drop stuff, it falls. It don't float away or act like it's in a 1/200 of 1 G
originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: intrptr
Two things:
1) Stop calling it microgravity, because it isn't microgravity.
2) Why do you have such a defeatist attitude? And no, don't say "realistic". Because we (humans) have done quite a bit and overcome many challenges through out history. I find, however, you seem to be one of those people who not only says the glass is half empty, but that it's filled with toxins that going to kill everyone. I hope you have SOMETHING in life that actually inspires you.
sheesh.
originally posted by: beetee
a reply to: Nexttimemaybe
Well, talking about the possibility of doing something and actually doing it - and footing the bill for doing it - is obviously two different things.
I, for one, am excited that we are getting a new moon base initiative.
We have been slacking, as a species, in this regard for decades :-D
BT
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: beetee
a reply to: Nexttimemaybe
Well, talking about the possibility of doing something and actually doing it - and footing the bill for doing it - is obviously two different things.
I, for one, am excited that we are getting a new moon base initiative.
We have been slacking, as a species, in this regard for decades :-D
BT
If anyone could do it, I would put my money on China. They have been very innovative and forward-thinking.
They also put the money in to the programs, unlike NASA.
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: beetee
a reply to: Nexttimemaybe
Well, talking about the possibility of doing something and actually doing it - and footing the bill for doing it - is obviously two different things.
I, for one, am excited that we are getting a new moon base initiative.
We have been slacking, as a species, in this regard for decades :-D
BT
Because any effort to go to the moon and return must be accomplished the same exact way.
Gynormous Saturn V boosters burn mega pounds of fuel, earth orbiters, lunar transition vehicles, moon orbiters, moon landers, earth return and reentry vehicles...
originally posted by: smurfy
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: beetee
a reply to: Nexttimemaybe
Well, talking about the possibility of doing something and actually doing it - and footing the bill for doing it - is obviously two different things.
I, for one, am excited that we are getting a new moon base initiative.
We have been slacking, as a species, in this regard for decades :-D
BT
Because any effort to go to the moon and return must be accomplished the same exact way.
Gynormous Saturn V boosters burn mega pounds of fuel, earth orbiters, lunar transition vehicles, moon orbiters, moon landers, earth return and reentry vehicles...
I don't think it should be the same way at this time. They should be able now to send all their stuff ahead with the need for personnel only as a last stage. intermediate posts, air launches to orbit, could also be part of the planned expedition..just more lateral thinking would be needed, and probably is already.
originally posted by: olaru12
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: beetee
a reply to: Nexttimemaybe
Well, talking about the possibility of doing something and actually doing it - and footing the bill for doing it - is obviously two different things.
I, for one, am excited that we are getting a new moon base initiative.
We have been slacking, as a species, in this regard for decades :-D
BT
If anyone could do it, I would put my money on China. They have been very innovative and forward-thinking.
They also put the money in to the programs, unlike NASA.
The Chinese with a military base on the moon....
Now that's a game changer!
Yep, NASA is just a money pit for the Executive administrators, select research subcontractors and lobbyists.
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: smurfy
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: beetee
a reply to: Nexttimemaybe
Well, talking about the possibility of doing something and actually doing it - and footing the bill for doing it - is obviously two different things.
I, for one, am excited that we are getting a new moon base initiative.
We have been slacking, as a species, in this regard for decades :-D
BT
Because any effort to go to the moon and return must be accomplished the same exact way.
Gynormous Saturn V boosters burn mega pounds of fuel, earth orbiters, lunar transition vehicles, moon orbiters, moon landers, earth return and reentry vehicles...
I don't think it should be the same way at this time. They should be able now to send all their stuff ahead with the need for personnel only as a last stage. intermediate posts, air launches to orbit, could also be part of the planned expedition..just more lateral thinking would be needed, and probably is already.
Thats the problem Smurf, if they are going back and expect to return to earth, the engineering constraints are the same then as now. They would have to do it the only way there is to do it...
We might see some cosmetic differences, solid rocket fuel as opposed to liquid... for instance.
and by late 2018 a two passenger flight round the moon..that flight has been booked by the two passengers.
originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: intrptr
Several years ago I was doing CGI work for a Mars Base simulation for a company with NASA as an advisor.
I got to talk a lot to some of their people because we were trying to make the simulation as realistic as possible.
Each idea was pretty much confirmed that any kind of base located on the moon or mars would be underground, simply because of the protection it affords from micrometeorites to both cosmic and solar radiation, and you don't really need to go that deep for it.
Most of what they were talking about, they were saying 50 to 100 years from now, but based on existing tech from today, and based on lack interest, funding, etc.
Still, while that time amount depressed me, these people were bright and happy to talk about it, as if they were talking about building a dam right here on Earth.
That cheered me up some, knowing that people who are in this area, who may never see their ideas come, were still excited about it, even in the face of those who thought going in space was such a waste of time and money.
.....or seem to see boogymen under every rock.
They might not have to do much digging for an underground base, if they can use an old hollow lava tube. They would still have to make one or more access points to the underground facility but if nature has done the work it might be nice to take advantage of that.
originally posted by: wildespace
Thing is, just getting the stuff for a manned base to the Moon or Mars is hard enough, but to send the equipment for digging a base underground increases the costs and complexity even more, not to mention that you'll probably need people there doing the digging in the first place.
This is really the science-fiction stuff that may not actually happen for many decades.
Natural tunnels known as lava tubes could safely house permanent bases on the Moon, scientists have said.
The underground volcanic structures have previously been proposed as ideal sites for human settlements.
Scientists have now assessed how stable these features might be, and found that tubes of 1km in size and bigger would be structurally sound.
They could protect against the challenges posed by the lunar environment.
Details of the work were presented at the 46th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (LPSC) in Texas.