2010 really isn't that far away. - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: If Marsman had a radio show... what would it be called?
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > General Forums > The Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2006-09-01, 02:05 AM   [Ignore Me] #1
Infernus
Lieutenant General
 
Infernus's Avatar
 
2010 really isn't that far away.


You go girls!

Yay!
__________________
Infernus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 02:28 AM   [Ignore Me] #2
Ivan
Contributor
teh Sexb0t
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


This will be the first time that Lockheed has been given a lead role in manned space flight. It comes after the company failed in a 1996 attempt to design the X-33 space plane, which was to be a replacement for the quarter-century-old shuttle fleet but was abandoned because of technical problems after NASA spent more than $900 million on it.
Damn it must be nice to get paid to work on something that never goes anywhere. $900 million tax write off!
__________________
[ Penis removed by Hamma. ]
NEVAR FORGET THE SHUNK!
(The Shunk Logs.)
Violated by ChiaHamma
Ivan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 02:31 AM   [Ignore Me] #3
Infernus
Lieutenant General
 
Infernus's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


Yeah, I mean look at how much Boeing has been making off the ISS.
__________________
Infernus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 05:51 AM   [Ignore Me] #4
TX3RN0BILL
Staff Sergeant
 
TX3RN0BILL's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


LOL, instead of making a replacement for the space shuttle, the U.S. go backward in time... guess the russians were right not to go ahead with any space shuttles... even the ESA only bets on rocketry...
__________________
TX3RN0BILL is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 10:35 AM   [Ignore Me] #5
Infernus
Lieutenant General
 
Infernus's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


Originally Posted by TX3RN0BILL View Post
LOL, instead of making a replacement for the space shuttle, the U.S. go backward in time... guess the russians were right not to go ahead with any space shuttles... even the ESA only bets on rocketry...

The shuttle program was great for what it let us do. Build stations in orbit, release large payloads, fix satelites, and more importantly - reuse the craft. The shuttle was created in a time when it was seen that humanity didn't need to go to space anymore - we'd conquered the moon and the soviet union, why waste the money. It's design reflects that.

However it is utterly unsuitable for use as a CEV, it needs a runway to land, I don't see any of those on the surface of the moon. This is basically the Apollo project on the 'roids of modern technology, because guess what, Apollo is a proven method. Now maybe when we have a colony on the moon, and are fully capable of building a landing strip there, we'll start to see commercial models of something shuttle-eque because it'll make mass transport that much easier.

It is most certainly unfair to say we're going back in time, if anything we're taking the next bold step into the future. I hate to break it to you, you won't be seeing Battlecruisers and TIE-Fighters floating around in space anytime soon, because we don't need them. All I can see us needing in the immeadiate future after the retirement of the Shuttle Fleet is something like the Orion to colonize, and 20 years down the line, an expanded-hold/transport shuttle-esque type craft.



Also, I don't think you fully comprehend why the Russian Buran program was cancelled. It was a huge money sink for a nation that just didn't need that at the time. The program was started in 1988 - a lot was happening in those few years... like the entire collapse of the soviet union, something that appearently put a lot of political strain on the country. It's also worth while to note that the Energia rocket booster which came out of the Buran Project has a moon-delivery payload capability, though it's never been tested. And another thing, maybe you haven't noticed, but Russia's space program isn't exactly a power house anymore after not picking up the a shuttle system.
__________________
Infernus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-03, 05:59 PM   [Ignore Me] #6
Rbstr
Contributor
Lieutenant General
 
Rbstr's Avatar
 
Misc Info
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


I'm kinda dissapointed, this is just the Apollo/Saturn V Version 2.0

Atleast we'll be going into space more often.
__________________

All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.

Last edited by Rbstr; 2006-09-03 at 06:00 PM.
Rbstr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 06:56 AM   [Ignore Me] #7
Derfud
Brigadier General
 
Derfud's Avatar
 
Misc Info
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


When do we start getting cool ships like:


or



or



Well, you get the point.
__________________
Derfud is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 07:43 AM   [Ignore Me] #8
Hamma
PSU Admin
 
Hamma's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


Pretty Cool.

They know the concept works, reliability is key.
__________________

PlanetSide Universe - Administrator / Site Owner - Contact @ PSU
Hamma Time - Evil Ranting Admin - DragonWolves - Commanding Officer
Hamma is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 10:17 AM   [Ignore Me] #9
OneManArmy
Contributor
Lieutenant General
 
OneManArmy's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


we'll start getting big ships like that when mankind decides to work together... which is sometime this side of never.
OneManArmy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 10:25 AM   [Ignore Me] #10
TX3RN0BILL
Staff Sergeant
 
TX3RN0BILL's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


You know, I'd say colonize Mars first. Terra-form it, so that Mankind can value Earth more. Maybe we'll get a little more pacific that way, and stop the wars and pollution. Mars has 1/3 of Earth's gravity and it's atmosphere is a lot thinner, so it would be more feasible to use Mars as a base from which to start building ships. Oh, if we only had a "stargate" to Mars... and Titan. That would get us started off in the right direction.
__________________
TX3RN0BILL is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 12:15 PM   [Ignore Me] #11
TX3RN0BILL
Staff Sergeant
 
TX3RN0BILL's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


Along with NASA, the russian space agency is one which has the most experience with space (remember, the first man out there was a russian), and they've filled many needs for every time a shuttle was lost - russian rockets seem to be more reliable than the shuttles.

AFAIK though the russian space agency is looking into the possibility of developing craft to provide the experience of space-flight in orbital flights etc, to the space tourists of which there seem to be plenty around - so I wish them good luck and hope they do a good job of doing those.

And since rockets existed before shuttles, in my view abandoning something more modern in favour of something that conceptually existed before is going back in time.

Also, colonization of the moon isn't something I'd be looking too much forward to because it's a moon without an atmosphere of its own - hence, any structure will not be minimally protected against meteorite strikes and such, which is a bit hazardous I'd say. Colonizing Mars, in that view, makes much more sense because it is possible to terra-form Mars (converting it's atmosphere into something breathable by humans, as well as rising surface temperatures to less extreme values with the greenhouse effect).

Also, I never mentioned anything about Starwars-type space fighters or such - although I believe that we're not quite alone here in this galaxy and the truth be out there - and everybody should know what only few know, and be able to partake of it, if you know what I mean.
__________________
TX3RN0BILL is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 12:25 PM   [Ignore Me] #12
Hamma
PSU Admin
 
Hamma's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


Going back in time would be pulling the Apollo craft out of the viewing area at Kennedy Space center and trying to launch it.

Originally Posted by OneManArmy View Post
we'll start getting big ships like that when mankind decides to work together... which is sometime this side of never.
Agreed
__________________

PlanetSide Universe - Administrator / Site Owner - Contact @ PSU
Hamma Time - Evil Ranting Admin - DragonWolves - Commanding Officer
Hamma is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-01, 01:15 PM   [Ignore Me] #13
Infernus
Lieutenant General
 
Infernus's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


Originally Posted by TX3RN0BILL View Post
And since rockets existed before shuttles, in my view abandoning something more modern in favour of something that conceptually existed before is going back in time.
Which is the practical equivilant of saying "Binary is old lets forget about it."

If I was an astronaut, I'd rather be sent to the moon and beyond in something that is proven to work, rather then some super cool new ultra-flyer spaceship with laserbeams that goes all soyuz on me. Its not like their telling the smithsonian to give them the lunar lander they have on display so that it can be used to go to the moon.

And whether or not you would do it, colonization of the moon is the first step. You mentioned meteroid strikes... well have you noted the general spatial location of mars? Its not exactly the most object-free environment. As far as I know, mars gets hit by some fairly good size rocks quite frequently. The moon is a jumping off point. Nasa doesn't like throwing its astronauts randomly into hostile extra-terrestrial environments. I wouldn't sign up for a trip to mars without first training somewhere that wasn't Earth, and the logical place for that is the moon - its 4 days away, as opposed to 9 some months for mars. Also in regards to distance, did you know that on average there is only one viable launch window for mars every 26 months and in the 9 months it takes to get there mars has moved approximately 3/8 of its orbit around the sun, the Earth moving even faster. A team on mars would be relatively sol for about a year and a half before anyone else could even launch to get to them.

In the end it all comes down to two things, practicality and safety. The moon is practical, the CEV is safe.
__________________
Infernus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-06, 11:04 AM   [Ignore Me] #14
TX3RN0BILL
Staff Sergeant
 
TX3RN0BILL's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


Originally Posted by Infernus View Post
The moon is practical, the CEV is safe.
I haven't ever questioned the safety of the CEV.

As for the practicality of the moon, in the long run, when Mars's atmosphere has been acclimatized for human presence, then oxygen supply will not present a problem. On the moon however, the oxygen supply will always be a concern. And with current technologies Mars may be still so far away, time-wise, but I'm confident that in the future technologies will enable us to travel faster around space. It's all right to use the moon until Mars becomes "available" as the second planet colonized by Man, but when that happens the moon will probably be forgotten as a stepping stone, and Mars will rule as next place after Earth to be of convenient use to Mankind.
__________________
TX3RN0BILL is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-02, 01:04 PM   [Ignore Me] #15
Hamma
PSU Admin
 
Hamma's Avatar
 
Re: 2010 really isn't that far away.


http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/co...ion/index.html

Pretty cool stuff on that site

edit: realplayer though
__________________

PlanetSide Universe - Administrator / Site Owner - Contact @ PSU
Hamma Time - Evil Ranting Admin - DragonWolves - Commanding Officer
Hamma is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply
  PlanetSide Universe > General Forums > The Lounge

Bookmarks

Discord

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:53 PM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.