Starship Enterprise could be a reality by 2032, engineer says

reply to post by SaturnFX


I would put my money on the gravity issue and not a home for capt Kirk. lol

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

We don't need to spend money in space, we don't need to spend money on war. We are over 15 trillion in debt, that debt was not created from one source. Our roads are falling apart. We need roads more than we need war or space programs. Common sense says to spend money on things with the best return for investment. The computer was not formed by sending ships in space, the technology could have been created without the space program. Mining ores in space cannot be nearly as profitable as recycling. I don't believe that people are so naive as to believe all the lies that are put out there by these people. If we don't start watching what we are doing everything will fall like dominoes. People have become deniers of common sense. Schools don't make people more intelligent, they make people more knowledgeable and conditioned. Conditioning of populations has been going on for a long time.

Mining the moon for Helium 3 and mining the asteroid belt for Platinum & Gold would grow

the GDP and - reduce - the $15 trillion debt.

That was part of the reasoning for those involved with Planetary Resources.

reply to post by intergalactic fire


We can't afford wars, space agencies, and many other costs that we are incurring. Space exploration is one thing that is not necessary for our survival. Do you want to pay 50 percent of your income in taxes in the future to pay these ever increasing bills? Our whole direction needs to be analyzed. We are going backwards which will end up in World war shortly.

because the society you and I both enjoy cannot survive so long as those types of individuals are allowed to utilize the advantages afforded by economics and technology to subject others.

reply to post by Aim64C


The reason why these individuals are still around is because of our economic system, culture.
Maybe we have to change that first.

A space ship to get to mars is only half the equation... a space ship to get you off of mars is a little more involved of an affair. One must escape Mars' considerably stronger gravitational field (compared to the moon) and atmosphere.

We can escape the earth's gravitational field. The escape velocity of earth is twice that from mars.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

I would put my money on the gravity issue and not a home for capt Kirk. lol

Funny you should mention that.

William Shatner has over $300 million from his Priceline.com investment.

He could invest in the project!

reply to post by Eurisko2012


But we don't need gold, most of it is just sitting in vaults all over the world. Money doesn't grow on moons.

reply to post by elevatedone


I'd be in my late (cough 60's cough) but would love to see this happen. But twenty years, I don't think we as a people would have it in us to do it yet. Unless something happens to us, like an awakening with this 2012 thingy.

reply to post by rickymouse


If tomorrow a giant meteor crashes with earth and humankind will be no more.
Maybe you will say then, why didn't we put our money on this moon-mars base project.
This counts as survival to me.
But i can tell you many worthless products or investements widely available now, that are not.

I rather pay taxes for those things than for the ones i'm paying right now.
Aren't you sick of analyzing, time for action right

reply to post by elevatedone

Great news, I just wonder why it has taken so long. If it is money, why don't the super rich get involved in such endeavors? Where is Richard Branson, Buffet, Soros, Koch Bros, Gates?!?!
Maybe they can/will build the nano-tube elevator we keep hearing about, to transport people and materials to an orbiting Enterprise.
Anyhoo. cool stuff and in the words of Jean Luc......MAKE IT SO

Peace

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
Mining the moon for Helium 3 and mining the asteroid belt for Platinum & Gold would grow

the GDP and - reduce - the $15 trillion debt.

That was part of the reasoning for those involved with Planetary Resources.

Thats ultimately the key here. I tried to state to the mouse that space is not just some empty void to joyride around...there are tons of resources out there that would make industry boom.

But I guess he just wants to be argumentative..meh, I guess every subject, no matter how logical the conclusion is, needs the odd dissenting voice just to make sure your not missing something.

a well functioning space station (see Citadel mesh a couple pages back I slapped in) would allow for heavy mining from the moon, asteroids, and other. Building of even more stations, ships, or whatever. Major tourist industry, and perhaps even a international neutral ground. But, I do think that it should be dollar for dollar tradeout. aka, if America fronts most of the money, then the activities going to and from the station profits in equal percent of who fronted the money to begin with.
Could trigger a new space race of sorts...and enormous amounts coming from the major countries to try and get a bigger piece of the pie.

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

But we don't need gold, most of it is just sitting in vaults all over the world. Money doesn't grow on moons.

People are paying Virgin Galactic $200,000 just for a quick ride up and down.

- Virgin Galactic -

How much would they pay to go to the moon?

-------
BTW, Helium 3 does show up on the moon.

Oh! I almost forgot. A Helium 3 reactor could provide electricity on the new Starship Enterprise.

I'd so love to see this happen since I'm a really big Star Trek fan myself.

But the obstacle is that Obama has pretty much ended the Space Shuttle, and is working on privatizing all space agencies so that the big corporations can run the space program.

So essentially the obstacle this guy has to overcome is that he has to convince that there is a large amount of profit. Many businessmen feel that the space program should be only for making them profit, and are very unimaginative.

AND I WANT MY HOLODECK!

Unfortunately this means I'll be in my seventies or older to enjoy it.

2032 I say they could do it by 2020 If they were to really push it. all people everywhere working toward this common goal hidden tech from russia china us 2020 could be done or mostly complete then sign me up! I would clean toilets on the enterprise for that opportunity to travel deep space

While cool, its a bit ass backwards.

Lets work out what we want to do and let the engineering flow from that.

I would suggest what we want to do it develop a craft with the ability to travel to Mars in realistic timescales of a few months, then push the endurance and the range further incrementally.

With nuclear/vasimr propulsion thats technically achievable any time we decide we seriously want it.

The config would not look anything like the enterprise, but who cares.

If we are pushing into sci-fi land i think the Sulaco from Aliens or the Earth Cruisers from B5 are more indicative of what future human deep space vessels will look like. When it comes to things that expensive form always follows function.

I believe it is entirely possible for our children/ grandchildren to see increased space travel// exploration.
ok, maybe our great grandchildren!

We're going to have hoover boards in 2015, right Marty?

Why build a geeky looking ship from Star Trek when you could build a frickin' Star Destroyer!

reply to post by elevatedone

This is way cool, IMO.

Yes, it is.....IMO too.

However, I foresee a great many hurdles still to overcome, for a "real" 'Star Fleet'-type starship.....primarily, the fact that we likely will not have the ability, by 2032, to 'control' gravity (as in, "artificially" induced gravitational fields, for a starship that is in "zero g") and, along those same lines, that same technology.....to control (or mitigate) the force of acceleration on the occupants of such a vessel.

There HAS to be a way to (firstly) to have control over the acceleration issues....if you're going to have Human "meat" on-board....to relieve, by some form of technology, the inevitable g-forces of acceleration.


Minor trivia from a long-time "Trekker" ("Trekkie" is a disparaging term, but common in modern vernacular, unfortunately)....in the 'Great Bird of the Galaxy's' original "Star Trek" concept (the 'GBoTG' was a moniker applied to the show's creator, Gene Roddenberry), the "transporter" came about purely because of both budget constraints, and the need to keep the scripts 'tight', and keep a fast pace.

That sort of tech is not necessary to this idea of the acceleration issue, for the Humans aboard a spacecraft....but, it ties together as part of the idea that Roddenberry drew from an iconic motion picture....an idea that he adapted, and does relate. The iconic film 'Forbidden Planet'.

Not very well-known, perhaps.....and some would say, by today's standards, had some "cheesy" special effects...however, as a story and plot, had some brilliant concepts.....for its day.

To tie it up....the "transporter" from 'Star Trek' was fleshed out from an idea in that movie.....to "solve" the acceleration issue, the crew were "de-materialized" for the periods when the spacecraft was altering velocity....no "meat" to get hurt, that way.....only electrons. Then, they were "re-materialized" when it was safe.

So, 'voila!' IF you can de-materialize someone, into constituent energy....why not, then, "beam" that energy somewhere else, to re-constitute? Thus, the 'Star Trek' "transporter".

(If you have never seen "Forbidden Planet", then I highly recommend it......look past the 1950s aspect of what was common, then....for 'shlocky' bad Science Fiction.....the film has been recognized as transcending the era).....


[PS],,,,well, fun doing research...seems a "re-make" is in the works! (Typical Hollywood).....:

www.imdb.com...

reply to post by satron

We're going to have hoover boards in 2015, right Marty?

Oh, a "Hoover" board?

That will make cleaning the house less of a chore, and more "fun"......

I believe mankind will have the ability to make "Star Trek/Star Wars/Stargate/etc" space travel technology a reality some day. But I don't feel it's going to be anytime soon. Maybe a thousand years from now at best. Regardless of how fast we've been moving for the past few hundred years and especially in the past century, mankind is still too hell bent on problems on this planet to be worried about perfecting space travel. One thing Star Trek got right for certain is that mankind needs to get over itself before we can explore the stars. That means no more need for money. No more racism. No more a lot of things. So that one day we all can work together to achieve space travel.

That day is a long ways off so long as people insist on hating each other for all kinds of reasons and for as long as we are dependent on currency of some form. We must do away with our greed. Until then all we will do is half ass it with our limited financial capabilities. And the unfortunate fact is the grand majority are over such things. It's the people in power that keeps status quo going. A handful of men and women, when compared to billions, dictate our day to day lives. That above all else must end before we achieve "Starfleet" status, and it will take another thousand years at least before it happens. That's assuming of course we don't destroy ourselves before then and ruin all progress that has been made.

That's not to say we couldn't achieve a renta Enterprise in the now. We should be nearing the capability of designing and building a ship worthy of traveling within our solar system without taking forever to get around the planets within 200 years, presuming it is indeed possible and if it is, we'll figure it out. But it'll be much longer before mankind as a whole has the will to do better with interstellar space travel. Sure wish I could be there for it but hey, being here now while we take our baby steps towards that future, not such a bad thing.