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.

 

How would you develop a space program?

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Xeven
I would build a ship yard in orbit and start building spacecraft in space that can operate in the solar system similar to the Navy ships we use now. Take a current submarine design and modify it for space and build it up there.

I also would stop wasting anything we place in orbit. For instance design the fuel tanks so they can be converted into habitat instead of burning them up in the atmosphere.

I would build space craft in a modular fashion so you can say easily replace the engine module when a newer design is ready.

I would design space telescope so they can self return to ISS for servicing and upgrades.

Other metal I would crash on the moon for future use instead of burning it up in atmosphere.
edit on 18-12-2013 by Xeven because: (no reason given)


I like your ideas




posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   

crazyewok

Xeven
I would build a ship yard in orbit and start building spacecraft in space that can operate in the solar system similar to the Navy ships we use now. Take a current submarine design and modify it for space and build it up there.

I also would stop wasting anything we place in orbit. For instance design the fuel tanks so they can be converted into habitat instead of burning them up in the atmosphere.

I would build space craft in a modular fashion so you can say easily replace the engine module when a newer design is ready.

I would design space telescope so they can self return to ISS for servicing and upgrades.

Other metal I would crash on the moon for future use instead of burning it up in atmosphere.
edit on 18-12-2013 by Xeven because: (no reason given)


I like your ideas



The ISS (back when it was still called Alpha or Freedom) was originally intended to be among other things a shipyard for interplanetary missions. There is no reason why when its scientific mission is over it could not be boosted to a higher orbit (rather than de-orbited into the Pacific Ocean) and form the core of your orbital shipyard.

edit on 19-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   

JadeStar

crazyewok

Xeven
I would build a ship yard in orbit and start building spacecraft in space that can operate in the solar system similar to the Navy ships we use now. Take a current submarine design and modify it for space and build it up there.

I also would stop wasting anything we place in orbit. For instance design the fuel tanks so they can be converted into habitat instead of burning them up in the atmosphere.

I would build space craft in a modular fashion so you can say easily replace the engine module when a newer design is ready.

I would design space telescope so they can self return to ISS for servicing and upgrades.

Other metal I would crash on the moon for future use instead of burning it up in atmosphere.
edit on 18-12-2013 by Xeven because: (no reason given)


I like your ideas



The ISS (back when it was still called Alpha or Freedom) was originally intended to be among other things a shipyard for interplanetary missions. There is no reason why when its scientific mission is over it could not be boosted to a higher orbit (rather than de-orbited into the Pacific Ocean) and form the core of your orbital shipyard.

edit on 19-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

The ISS is going to be around for another 20 years or so, and Russians plan to use it for launching missions to Mars.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 06:10 AM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 


Yup your right russia going to recycle alot of it and use it as as shipyard to build a nuclear propulsion craft.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 06:24 AM
link   
I would go with space elevator

www.space.com...



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 10:03 PM
link   

wildespace

JadeStar

crazyewok

Xeven
I would build a ship yard in orbit and start building spacecraft in space that can operate in the solar system similar to the Navy ships we use now. Take a current submarine design and modify it for space and build it up there.

I also would stop wasting anything we place in orbit. For instance design the fuel tanks so they can be converted into habitat instead of burning them up in the atmosphere.

I would build space craft in a modular fashion so you can say easily replace the engine module when a newer design is ready.

I would design space telescope so they can self return to ISS for servicing and upgrades.

Other metal I would crash on the moon for future use instead of burning it up in atmosphere.
edit on 18-12-2013 by Xeven because: (no reason given)


I like your ideas



The ISS (back when it was still called Alpha or Freedom) was originally intended to be among other things a shipyard for interplanetary missions. There is no reason why when its scientific mission is over it could not be boosted to a higher orbit (rather than de-orbited into the Pacific Ocean) and form the core of your orbital shipyard.

edit on 19-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

The ISS is going to be around for another 20 years or so, and Russians plan to use it for launching missions to Mars.


Not exactly true.

The Russians plan to separate their modules from it before it is de-orbited sometime after 2020 but no later than 2028. That's 15 years maximum and 7 years from now minimum.

Russia is building another space station called OPSEK which these separate modules would join.




The orbital outpost is currently set to continue flying until at least 2020, although ongoing studies are being used to evaluate how long the ISS can continue to perform its duties, especially from the standpoint of the hardware’s long-term health.

At present, it is hoped the ISS could continue to operate until at least 2028, pending political and international agreement on the operational requirements and running costs.



The Exploration Gateway Platform, a discussion by NASA and Boeing at the end of 2011, suggested using leftover USOS hardware and 'Zvezda 2' [sic] as a refueling depot and servicing station located at one of the Earth Moon Lagrange points, L1 or L2. While the entire USOS cannot be reused and will be discarded, some other Russian modules are planned to be reused. Nauka, the Node module, two science power platforms and Rassvet, launched between 2010 and 2015 and joined to the ROS may be separated to form OPSEK. The Nauka module of the ISS will be used in the station, whose main goal is supporting manned deep space exploration. OPSEK will orbit at a higher inclination of 71 degrees, allowing observation to and from all of the Russian Federation.




www.nasaspaceflight.com...

China's station Tiangong 3 will likely be ready around then.


A larger basic permanent space station would be the third and last phase of Project 921. This will be a modular design with an eventual weight of around 60 tons, to be completed sometime before 2020. The first section, designated Tiangong 3, is scheduled for launch after Tiangong 2. Tiangong 3 will weigh 22 tons and be 18.1 metres long. Additional modules will be connected over several missions to build the space station.

This could also be the beginning of China's crewed international cooperation, the existence of which was officially disclosed for the first time after the launch of Shenzhou 7.
The Chinese space station is scheduled to be completed in 2020, just as the International Space Station is scheduled to retire.


So right around the time they're thinking about scrapping the ISS, China's big space station will be coming together and China has said they are open to international co-operation on building it so that might become ISS-2.

edit on 19-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 08:41 PM
link   
The ISS kinda was sort of a victim of NASA's arrogance with regards to its funding, the thing had been in development hell since the 1980's, when it went by the name "Space Station Freedom"


The best thing to happen would be a program to create inexpensive launch systems.

getting to orbit is a great deal of the difficulty and expense of spacecraft.



posted on Dec, 25 2013 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by NonsensicalUserName
 


I agree all the effort should be about reduceing cost. There are a few very viable plans but they need a jump start in funding.

I always will favour orion, though i know its not everyone cup of tea,

But real on the table plans at the moment that look promiseing are the falcon x program and skylon plus germany i think are onto something in regards to mass produced cheap rockets. There though will only halve or quater costs.

Space elevator, orbital airships and lunch loops are a bit of a way off but still pretty viable idead though the space elevator and launch loop would require NASA to actually fund a project and STICK WITH IT!

Fusion rockets could be a very real possibilty in the comeing decades and i still dont know why nasa cancelled NERVA as it was a good idea for a upper stage.



posted on Feb, 19 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


I've heard NERVA was cancelled due to 2 reasons.

1. its a nuclear reactor (a live one) in space, and there could be some legality issues with it as some nations would take it as a violation of various international agreements + dangers of nuclear waste material being released if the rocket were to explode.

2. funding it would be a ticket to only more expensive missions into space. (congress was tired of the political and economic expense of the apollo program(it was a fraction of the national budget, but it was really show-y and thus was destined for the chopping block), they did not want a repeat with some fantastical manned-mission to mars)



posted on Feb, 19 2014 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Me personally? I'd prefer that they'd launch from a higher altitude than Florida. I don't care if they don't land in the same place. It would be fun to use a giant catapult, but that's not all that realistic.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 06:35 PM
link   
i would use the nuclear engine to drive a microwave emitting device M.E.D to microwave plasma ejected by the sun to create propulsion whilst in space, in the atmosphere the M.E.D to microwave atmospheric water with additional input from tanks to create thrust from the resulting ignition of the hydrogen/oxygen.

No fall out, uses existing technology(which has probably been thought of yet suppressed), and keeps the hippi's happy unless it crashes.



posted on Aug, 1 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   
It's possible to use a big cannon like HARP project did or later SHARP.
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
Which later became Quicklaunch
en.wikipedia.org...

It can reduce costs for materials and fuel in space. Travel at high speeds most likely would damage or overheat some materials, so delivery of at least some of them in raw or stable form would be more desirable. Processing would be need in orbit using several remotely controlled modules, lifted using "conventional" methods.



posted on Aug, 2 2014 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Yea let the posters on conspiracy sites develop space exploration.
They seem to know everything.



posted on Aug, 3 2014 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
Yea let the posters on conspiracy sites develop space exploration.
They seem to know everything.

I reflect your proposition entirely, couldn't do any worse than whats been done so far, forty five years and a couple of trillion dollars and we still ARE NOT on another planet.(officially) C"MON




posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Rail gun assisted rocket/jet to get the basic habitation the construction crew would use.

Rail gun alone for robust materials.

The background-normal-citizen level of technology should be higher than it is.

We beat the Soviet Union because of the application of technology in every consumer good. We had technology in depth throughout our economy. The Soviet Union had technology restricted to specific tasks.

We aren't in space because we are limited in education and liberty.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Yea lots of floating around the ISS but no strolls on the moon, maybe we got a slap on the hand for going past our boundary.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: subtopia
Yea lots of floating around the ISS but no strolls on the moon, maybe we got a slap on the hand for going past our boundary.


The slap on the hand was from the US taxpayer who saw no reason for exploration beyond low earth orbit. If NASA had the budget of any one of the US military services there might be a probe halfway to Alpha Centauri by now.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   
You damn ewoks ever since the emperor died you have been claiming you defeat the armed soldiers of the empire..

Admit it.. it was executive meddling nothing more



You have several obstacles
**hand wavium**

The secret to my program
Reuse and reuse

First -
Rail gun launcher five to ten miles long
Three sites

Not taking bidders
I will have to find the supplies myself first.

I think I secretly buy junk yards and begin a long process of resmelting
Buy as many junk planes, tanks, and boats from government
Same on electronics

Then as this is going on I have to build in conservative states
Sorry my fellow democrats. I do not have time to piss away with rules and stupid EPA officials

Make some deals for prison labor
Say seven bucks an hour paid to their family members
Small cut to the warden (not the prison system)

Note: might say we are building mav train for free governemnet money
add in words green and eco friendly
I am building with recycled materials




Now with the EM launchers I only have to make sure the pilots live ..

First stage of Construction
We have to stage this out.

The ISS is to primitive for my needs
But we will be shipping materials to them as we head towards the moon

First goal is a Colony
Construction of a new habitat
Then proceed with mining

As the Colony program is going
The raw materials being sent up will be used to construct a building platform

From their it will process the raw materials to Space station liberty

Know you asked what is special for this program

1)certain construction techniques that will not be shared till I can get them up and running

Just picture human skin and onion layers

I wont have what happened to virgin happen to me


2) the next part is the crew and support staff

This is another area I will control tightly

Security has to be will ing to not allow people in the area with deadly force

a)Also their are restrictions on colonist
Not going to say what they are but certain people will not be allowed on the launchers

Example
Congressmen or Senators
Federal judges
Politicians of any sorts
( to include the people who served in student government.. They can all stay on earth where they are needed)

Government employees have to get a waiver from me
(military has own special brand hiring process)
even then every other person gets to vote
one no vote and they cant go

Married couples get priority
Criminal records will not be a bar to allow as colonist (see above with exception)


In conclusion
Right personnel
EM Catapult(very long in miles)
Recycled metals and plastics
Repurposed supplies (see all green
)
Sturdier and cheaper launch tubes

Colony
Construction platform

And yes weapon systems will be deployed



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
space program plan.

1 i would have several divisions to focus on different goals but which would also coordinate with each other. some divisions i would create are

a Nuclear and fusion propulsion system program to develop and test nuclear engines and related systems and integration. engines would be tested on earth and when matured would be transported or manufactured in orbit.

i would fly VASIMR and M2P2 prototypes as well as advanced ion engines such as the ones that are already propelling long range probes. VASIMR and M2P2 are lab tested and the VASIMR is supposed to be tested on the ISS soon.

a department tasked with building the capability to build large structures or craft in space and to develop asteroid or lunar mining refining and transportation of bulk materials to construction sites or for transfer to earth.

a department tasked to investigate exotic advanced propulsion concepts a small part of which would be devoted to investigating fringe or kooky or just strange ideas. It would mostly do high impact low probability of success but scientifically plausible ideas but would quietly investigate fringe ideas too.

on a different track i would advocate for a more stable budgetary cycle so that political changes are less disruptive on long term projects. concurrently i would have deliberate outreach to private wealthy individuals, corporations and not so wealthy people to develop private space technologies and lift capabilities and also to seek additional funding. like a bond program or crowd funding. i bet that you could get more funding from a cheerful giver than one coerced by taxation. also as part of this programs of school visitations or teleconferences to get kids to become scientists and engineers and software developers to create a new pool of future engineers and so forth.

develop an orbital scaffold "drydock" for human and robotic assembly for large structures and vessels. on that tack i would develop large articulated 3D print technology. the print head moves around to build objects larger than the printhead.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: NonsensicalUserName
reply to post by crazyewok
 


I've heard NERVA was cancelled due to 2 reasons.

1. its a nuclear reactor (a live one) in space, and there could be some legality issues with it as some nations would take it as a violation of various international agreements + dangers of nuclear waste material being released if the rocket were to explode.

2. funding it would be a ticket to only more expensive missions into space. (congress was tired of the political and economic expense of the apollo program(it was a fraction of the national budget, but it was really show-y and thus was destined for the chopping block), they did not want a repeat with some fantastical manned-mission to mars)


the space treaty does not forbid the peaceful use of nuclear reactors in space. just weapons. the real problem of NERVA and similar engines (there were more than one successful design) was that in lift off if would be spewing nuclear bits out with the exhaust and if there was an accident during ascent it would be even worse. the primary killer of nuclear engines were environmental not treaty violation. we had not developed more advanced designs that retain all of the nuclear bits inside the engine; though several closed cycle systems were proposed and studied; the engineering was far more complex and not feasible during the NERVA study era.

as for Orion and Daedalus designs; there was a in addition to the environmental issues the proliferation and security issues with developing cheap and plentiful mini-nuclear bombs needed for those designs. however we now know how to do it without the proliferation threat. we can make an orion or daedalus style nuclear rocket using deuterium pellets instead of functional bombs.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join