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.

 

Lockheed Wins 4 Billion Contract

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 01:15 PM
link   

I don't want to see us go to Mars until we get a self-sufficient moon base setup(ei They grow all their own food, refine oxygen and nitrogen from Rocks and Soil, etc). That way, when we finally do go to Mars, we will have all the tools necessary to go there permanantly.



I agree. Another problem that needs to be solved before we go to mars is how to effectively shield humans on a spacecraft from cosmic radiation when on a long journey outside of the earths natural radiation shielding.

So meanwhile on the Moon construction techniques using on site building materials could be pioneered , soil building experiments for plant life.. Possible mining / refining operations for needed materials are all things that could be first learned on the moon for use as a stepping stone to mars. This way when we are ready to develop a colony on Mars much of the needed experience and know how will already be there.



jra

posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   
I just don't understand all the hate for capsules. It's not 1960's tech, there is nothing primative about them either. The capsule system is just a very efficient design for interplanetary travel.



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 10:03 PM
link   


Another problem that needs to be solved before we go to mars is how to effectively shield humans on a spacecraft from cosmic radiation when on a long journey outside of the earths natural radiation shielding.


This is actually fairly easy, what we need to learn is the most efficient(read as: lightest) way to achieve this. For a Moon base, it's even easier. Here is how I would do it.

First would be to build it underground and under the icecaps of the Moon. Water is a good radiation shield. Second would be to build the base materials out of a multi walled membrane material holding additional water and sandwideched between a tungsten carbide outerhull(yes I know really expensive but it'd be worth it in the long run), lead for intermediate hull and some other inert inner hull.

In space, some scientists and engineers are proposing we send along a large magnetic field generator to act like the earths magnetic field and deflect and absorb a significant portion of the radiation. For the rest, you could use water, lead and tungsten.



I just don't understand all the hate for capsules. It's not 1960's tech, there is nothing primative about them either. The capsule system is just a very efficient design for interplanetary travel.


People hate them because they look crappy. I blame the Sci-Fi network...

[edit on 1-9-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 10:36 PM
link   

In space, some scientists and engineers are proposing we send along a large magnetic field generator to act like the earths magnetic field and deflect and absorb a significant portion of the radiation. For the rest, you could use water, lead and tungsten


Yes but those things are all very "heavy". The heavier you make the spacecraft the less in can accelerate using the same amount of fuel thus making a longer trip.. requiring more life support...

As you said scientist are proposing the use of a magnetic field generator . It is not yet known how well it will work and how much material shielding will be necessary. This is why research and development is necessary in this area.

I expect the developement of a new "space age material" that is lightweight and sheilds radiation effectively will be needed rather than the use of well known "heavy" sheilding materials.

[edit on 1-9-2006 by Heckman]



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 10:44 PM
link   
This is just for the crew/perishable cargo module. The safety of all living orginisms is paramount for a successful mission to Mars. Mass should come second to safety. Which is also why some attempts at artificial gravity is also paramount for a successful Mars mission. The Wasting that occurs in LEO after just a few months is significant. The time to Mars will take at least 4 months if we use Solar Sails that is. (Actually the time could even be cut down to a month using a special reflective film and a laser)

All unperishable cargo will go via automated craft and perhaps even do a little prep work on the surface of mars(like self erecting temporary habitation modules).



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 11:49 PM
link   

The time to Mars will take at least 4 months if we use Solar Sails that is. (Actually the time could even be cut down to a month using a special reflective film and a laser)


I had not heard of such efficient solar sails. Sounds very promising. What type / size laser is to be used ?



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Its a complete and utter waste of money.
4 BILLION just to send a vehicle in to space? Its sickening to think of how useful that
money could be spent on, instead of a spacecraft that if or when it gets to mars and finds maybe proof of life, or something really interesting on the planet they wont tell
us anything about it anyway.

All we'll get is more rocks, dust and more covered up bs, just so we can get excited
about a mission that we'll only care or hear about it in its long journey, is when
it takes off or lands.

Why are people bothered.


jra

posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Its a complete and utter waste of money.
4 BILLION just to send a vehicle in to space? Its sickening to think of how useful that
money could be spent on


Have you seen the amount of money spent on the "War on Terror"? $4 billion used for space and science and to further our knowledge on such things seems like hardly a waste to me. It's also not that much money.


instead of a spacecraft that if or when it gets to mars and finds maybe proof of life, or something really interesting on the planet they wont tell
us anything about it anyway.


Right...



All we'll get is more rocks, dust and more covered up bs, just so we can get excited about a mission that we'll only care or hear about it in its long journey, is when it takes off or lands.

Why are people bothered.


Because some of us find this sort of stuff very interesting. It's not just about collecting rocks and dust. It's about travelling and living on another planet/moon and advancing our technology and our understanding about ourselves and our own planet etc.

What would you prefer to spend $4billion on out of curiosity?

EDIT: Just as a comparison. The US spends $4.5 Billion per MONTH in Iraq on just Military operating costs alone.

[edit on 2-9-2006 by jra]



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem
I just favored the re useable craft. So that is why I said it is unforchant that it will no longer be used.

Nasa has said that Orion will be reusable...But of course not 100%...an example is its heat shield...which burns off on re-entry and is a one-time-use thing.



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
Nasa has said that Orion will be reusable...But of course not 100%...an example is its heat shield...which burns off on re-entry and is a one-time-use thing.


Thanks Murcielago,
I am glad to hear that the structer will be re-useable. But the heat shield not being does make me wonder. The reausable heat shield on the shuttle has now been in service for quite a while. So one would think that we do know quite a bit about how it works. But it has been chosen not to be used on the new craft. It makes me wonder if the efectivness of the reusable heat shield is not what it was thought it was.



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem
The reausable heat shield on the shuttle has now been in service for quite a while. So one would think that we do know quite a bit about how it works. But it has been chosen not to be used on the new craft. It makes me wonder if the efectivness of the reusable heat shield is not what it was thought it was.


The Shuttle uses fragile tiles, which is fine since it lands on its wheels on a runway.

But Orion will use parachutes, and it will land on its bottom...which would crush all the tiles.....which would make them un-reusable.



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago

The Shuttle uses fragile tiles, which is fine since it lands on its wheels on a runway.

But Orion will use parachutes, and it will land on its bottom...which would crush all the tiles.....which would make them un-reusable.


Murcielago,
Yes that is quite right. However if there was the desire to use a reauseable heat shield I am sure that the problem of landing on its bottom could be worked through.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join