Dawn of the Star Destroyer

[King Profile]

To the forward command post, take me.

[ferret963 Profile ICQYIM]

Makes you wonder how safe that will be considering the problems NASAA has and they have mucho dinero!

[PudriK Profile]

Money has nothing to do with safety, given such vast differences in design. The Soyuz is a very safe design, and could be made for much cheaper than the shuttle.

Good luck to them, considering they haven't launched a suborbital flight, seems a bit early to announce orbital plans. Didn't they learn from SpaceShipOne: one step at a time. That was NASA's recipe for success, up to and not including the shuttle program.

[cavalierlwt Profile]

Meh, I have only one thing to say: Big time moon base or nothing. Build a full sized permanent moon base, that should be the goal of all the countries involved in space exploration. Once you do that, you can start all your missions from the moon. Bring up all the components and payload in multiple, modular, stages to the moon. Put it together and launch from the moon. Much easier, way easier than the whole weight/size problem you find when you launch everything from the Earth. Moon base first, then everything else falls into place.

[kevd Profile]

the shuttles started flying in the early '80s. the US is using very outdated technology for space flight, thats why we are retiring the shuttle fleet and returning to orbital capsules.

[PraiseA||ah Profile]

Is it just me or does that look like a paper airplane?

[King Profile]

if they start manning the damn things with clones, im outta here.

[TChicken Profile]

Originally posted by kevd
the shuttles started flying in the early '80s. the US is using very outdated technology for space flight, thats why we are retiring the shuttle fleet and returning to orbital capsules.

from the link:

the new spacecraft would use a 1960-1970s era shell wrapped around a lighter inner body with updated, modern electronics.

I don't know, 80's tech sounds pretty modern for space stuff.
On the onter hand, we know star destroyers are a lot more durable than the space shuttle (I saw it in a movie once).
Anyway, the best part of all this space innovation is I may be able to go sometime in my life. yay!

[SavageParrot Profile]

Originally posted by ferret963
Makes you wonder how safe that will be considering the problems NASAA has and they have mucho dinero!

Consider the difference between a sports car of 1981 and one of today. We've come a long way...

[Destructor Profile]

you won't see my ass on there till well after the first major accident. Call me old but i don't wana trust my life to any technology until they've seen it fuck up in the field a few times.

[ferret963 Profile ICQYIM]

Well look how far gaming has come since the 80's lol I don't think they just leave all the systems and computers circa 1980 on those beasts. Designing this thing and getting the material and the specialized workers to build it isn't going to be cheap. I suppose they'll do it right, we don't want another zeppelin incident, or the first Americans lost in space to be civilians. I doubt the price for one those rides will be anywhere near affordable for the common man. This is probably the shot in the arm the space industry needs, to introduce capitalistic market to it. Since the Soviets are gone a lot of people are wondering just what NASSA is doing. If there is enough interest, maybe they will build a nice little Hilton on the moon.

"When deep space exploration ramps up,
it will be corporations that name
everything. The IBM Stellar Sphere.
The Philip Morris Galaxy. Planet
Starbucks."

[[ecgn] btt Profile]

I would give my left nut to go into space. With that said. I think all these space agencies need to be stopped. And they need to focus their money and brain power on more pressing things. Like alternative energy. I would be alot more willing to pay $20,000 for a new alternative car then a ticket into space.

[Colonel Ingus Profile]

Moon base Schmoon base. Once you are in orbit you're already halfway to anywhere in the Solar system. Read some Heinlein, or bettter yet Jerry Pournelle.

And Bulletproof that's exactly the kind of thinking that would have us living in the past.

Alternative energy car huh? Maroon. Fuell Cell technology came directly from the Apollo program, one of a huge number of items that came out of space exploration and that we benefit from today.

Worried about the environment huh? Good thing we have those satellites in orbit to monitor the environment.

Sheesh. Some people.

[cavalierlwt Profile]

Originally posted by Colonel Ingus
Moon base Schmoon base. Once you are in orbit you're already halfway to anywhere in the Solar system. .

My point was launching from the Earth restricts the size and weight of the craft, creates a million compromises and tradeoffs. Build a moonbase, then bring the mission up to the moonbase in stages. Assemble it there. The vehicle can be (after it's assembled) so much bigger and heavier if you launch it from the moon.
Some people!

[Colonel Ingus Profile]

Originally posted by cavalierlwt
My point was launching from the Earth restricts the size and weight of the craft, creates a million compromises and tradeoffs. Build a moonbase, then bring the mission up to the moonbase in stages. Assemble it there. The vehicle can be (after it's assembled) so much bigger and heavier if you launch it from the moon.
Some people!

Why not assemble it in orbit and then launch from there?

Why would you want to waste all the extra time, expense, fuel etc. going into the Moon's gravity well and then having to come back out again?

You're still going to need to get it into orbit no matter how you "package" it and then later assemble it.

You would have sounded at least halfway intelligent if you said build a moon base and then use moon built products to launch from there. THAT would make sense.