Topic: Going to pluto

[prometheus]

The Apollo missions gave a man more delta v than any man has ever had before or since, and the way our manned space program has progressed since the 1970's, may ever have again.  Safety and progress are not mutually exclusive, and I wouldn't put a man up there unless I had taken every reasonable precaution to make sure I would get them back...

9 hours or 72 hours?  A man lives for seventy two years on average so explain to me how the f*ck that bloody many hours is problematic in a mission when it has proven it's worth in saving three lives already? 

If only the human brain, from time to time was as utilised as reliably as the PGNS on an Apollo Space Craft...   

Prom,

By becoming an astronaut, you give something called 'implied conscent.'

You say "I know doing this could well kill me, but I think the rewards outweigh the risks to myself and all those I care about."

Those people are daring death to mearly sit on several tons of high explosives and have it blow up underneath them, flinging them into an enviroment that is hostile in every definition of the word. Even BEING in space is a risk... one they not only take happily and willingly, but one they fight for the privlage of taking!

Were I able to qualify to be an astornaut, I'd GLADLY play the odds if I thought I could possibly have a solar generator, per-charged batteries, and maybe even a small pre-fab hut waiting on the next guys.... I'm already gambling with my life, so I might as well go for the big payoff.

Because there's no telling what the NEXT crew could do. Two or three missions might be all it takes to have a pressurized barracks there, if we preposition supplies prior to the mission. Imagine... three missions to a moon station. A dozen more to a real moon BASE. 5 years, and now we have a facility that could support construction and launch of a Mars mission.

Like I said, sometimes progress and safety work agianst each other. And sometimes, it just makes more sense for a man who's already gambling with his life to simply put all on the table and hope to win big...

I'm sure that the astronauts will probably agree...

“If we die, we want people to accept it. We're in a risky business, and we hope that if anything happens to us it will not delay the program. The conquest of space is worth the risk of life.”

—Gus Grissom (John Barbour et al., Footprints on the Moon (The Associated Press, 1969), p. 125

Someone who takes risks to protect others to save lives or to push boundaries etc is a hero.

Someone who takes risks because he wants to shave a couple of days off a journey is a f*cking idiot...

[prometheus]

but our payload size has increased dramatically since then

I must have missed that mission to the moon...  It must have happened in the 90's during one of my alcoholic blackouts...

He never said anything about a moon mission, Prom... just that we can loft much bigger things now than then... and we can.

I'm sure that we can, but we'd much rather spend the money on colonial adventures at the moment...

[J. Carney]

Someone who takes risks to protect others to save lives or to push boundaries etc is a hero.

Someone who takes risks because he wants to shave a couple of days off a journey is a f*cking idiot...

Prom... pushing the boundries is what I'm suggesting. Notice WHY I was suggesting getting them there faster. I was saying we use the time we gain to have them WORK and BUILD. Within a few years, even with only a few manned trips to the moon a year, we'd have some real BUILDINGS on the moon... stuff that's at least as good as what we have in Antarctica!

Im not doing it just for the same of breaking a speed record- I'm saying let's do what wee have to do to make the advances possible... I'm saying EXACTLY what Gus Grissom said.

PS-
If I had 20/20 vision- or could even correct to it after surgery- I'd be at Rucker right now going to Army Flight School in hopes of getting into NASA. But my eyes are too bad to get into the Space Program as things stand now... hell, I couldn't even fly for Delta.

[J. Carney]

but our payload size has increased dramatically since then

I must have missed that mission to the moon...  It must have happened in the 90's during one of my alcoholic blackouts...

He never said anything about a moon mission, Prom... just that we can loft much bigger things now than then... and we can.

I'm sure that we can, but we'd much rather spend the money on colonial adventures at the moment...

We're still #1 at putting people into space... no matter what we are doing down here.

[prometheus]

but our payload size has increased dramatically since then

I must have missed that mission to the moon...  It must have happened in the 90's during one of my alcoholic blackouts...

He never said anything about a moon mission, Prom... just that we can loft much bigger things now than then... and we can.

I'm sure that we can, but we'd much rather spend the money on colonial adventures at the moment...

We're still #1 at putting people into space... no matter what we are doing down here.

Actually, the Russians are...  The US Manned space program has been all but grounded since 2003...   Now that China are putting men up, hopefully the US and EU will  raise their games...

[J. Carney]

Actually, the Russians are...  The US Manned space program has been all but grounded since 2003...   Now that China are putting men up, hopefully the US and EU will  raise their games...

How many people have we put into space?

On the Moon?

What about Europe? In their own home-built rockets, please... it don't count if you use our gear.

Now, China is ALMOST in the double-digits, IIRC.
Europe has put ZERO people into space by themselves.


I rest my case.

[prometheus]

Prom... pushing the boundries is what I'm suggesting. Notice WHY I was suggesting getting them there faster. I was saying we use the time we gain to have them WORK and BUILD. Within a few years, even with only a few manned trips to the moon a year, we'd have some real BUILDINGS on the moon... stuff that's at least as good as what we have in Antarctica!

I dont see how that follows, I really don't...  We're not talking about some car crazy jaunt round Brands Hatch here...  It's not about breaking speed records...  Hell, the small amount of food, water and LiOH you need to last a few men three days is insignificant compared to massive quantity of fuel you'd need for your breaking maneuver the way you're looking at doing it...

[prometheus]

Actually, the Russians are...  The US Manned space program has been all but grounded since 2003...   Now that China are putting men up, hopefully the US and EU will  raise their games...

How many people have we put into space?

On the Moon?

What about Europe? In their own home-built rockets, please... it don't count if you use our gear.

Now, China is ALMOST in the double-digits, IIRC.
Europe has put ZERO people into space by themselves.


I rest my case.

In the last few years, no where near as many as Russia...  Hell, I'd even read that NASA were contemplating abandoning the shuttle fleet and buying some of Soyuz capsules...  You're preaching to the converted on Europe though.  I think it's disgraceful that we haven't put a man in space yet...

You have to admit, the shuttle has to go...   Hell, I wouldn't even drive a twenty year old car at 100% of it's rated performance...

[prometheus]

On the Moon?

Aye, thirty years ago... 

Unpalatable as it may be, the ISS is being kept alive by the Soyuz program while the rest of us sit and do little to help...

[prometheus]

The mission itself i could actualy do that maths for, it follows the same concepts for interplanatary mission, using a hohmann tranfer (effeciency).

if you can do the Maths, I can pilot the ship, now we just need an engineer to build the hardware...  The Tus-Prom Space Agency.

[J. Carney]

Prom... pushing the boundries is what I'm suggesting. Notice WHY I was suggesting getting them there faster. I was saying we use the time we gain to have them WORK and BUILD. Within a few years, even with only a few manned trips to the moon a year, we'd have some real BUILDINGS on the moon... stuff that's at least as good as what we have in Antarctica!

I dont see how that follows, I really don't...  We're not talking about some car crazy jaunt round Brands Hatch here...  It's not about breaking speed records...  Hell, the small amount of food, water and LiOH you need to last a few men three days is insignificant compared to massive quantity of fuel you'd need for your breaking maneuver the way you're looking at doing it...

Prom... I'm not 100% up to speed on this, but I don't think I'm too far off:

Getting them there FAST shouldn't present a problem with breaking.I mean, you are getting rid of most of the mass when the last stage seperates. The high speed SAVES mass, making the amount that you are actually having to stop less than Apollo, just moving faster. Now, the lander is alread in orbit waiting. That's right... the HEAVY stuff DID go in slow, and it didn't need to have a huge engine to break it.

In short, send the astronauts there in a raceboat, and have most of the mass waiting, already shipped their by a freighter.

The craft getting the astronauts there in 9 hours is just 2 things- life support and enough engine to slow a light, small craft for a docking maneuver. Since the mass being stopped is a fraction of the mass that had to moved to begin with, the rocket engine (which still hasn't wasted a drop of fuel) can be a lot smaller and lighter. Plus, every second it bursn makes the craft it's stopping LIGHTER, so it's stopping power increases as it burns.

Hell, Maybe they take a day instaed of 9 hours... they still have a LOT more time to work, and a lot more power left for the return trip.

Like I said... I don't know the physics, and I'm never going to... but there are people that DO know the physics that can make it happen if someone is willing to try it. I also know that since you hae neither astrophysics degree nor work for a space agence... well, you're still no more qualified than me to say "good idea" or "bad idea".

[J. Carney]

Actually, the Russians are...  The US Manned space program has been all but grounded since 2003...   Now that China are putting men up, hopefully the US and EU will  raise their games...

How many people have we put into space?

On the Moon?

What about Europe? In their own home-built rockets, please... it don't count if you use our gear.

Now, China is ALMOST in the double-digits, IIRC.
Europe has put ZERO people into space by themselves.


I rest my case.

In the last few years, no where near as many as Russia...  Hell, I'd even read that NASA were contemplating abandoning the shuttle fleet and buying some of Soyuz capsules...  You're preaching to the converted on Europe though.  I think it's disgraceful that we haven't put a man in space yet...

You have to admit, the shuttle has to go...   Hell, I wouldn't even drive a twenty year old car at 100% of it's rated performance...

Russia is only able to outdo us because, as you said, we've tried to keep fixing a clunker up instead of buying a new car... and the clunker is costing us more than the payments on the new car would.

If we ever get a new spacecraft design into production, there will STILL be no one on Earth that will be able to equal the US.

And sorry, but I don't think Europe will ever be able to be a 'space power'- Britain is better offgoing solo. Europe working togeather presents all the problems the US faces, magnified by national sovereignty and multiplied by thousnads of years of feuds.

[prometheus]

Like I said... I don't know the physics, and I'm never going to... but there are people that DO know the physics that can make it happen if someone is willing to try it. I also know that since you hae neither astrophysics degree nor work for a space agence... well, you're still no more qualified than me to say "good idea" or "bad idea".

Just to make this clear,  I don't think you're a stupid guy by any means, I reckon you think pretty clearly, and bear in mind that TUS is on your side and I could be the one who's talking out of leftfield...    I do know how to fly the Apollo Hardware though...  Most of it...

 I'm not actually arguing that it is unfesiable to get their fast, simply that IMO it is a pointless risk with little or no benifit to it...  Getting into a spacecraft will always be risky, especially the Earth Orbit Injection from Launch, but there's no point in building unnecessary risk into the mission... 

I don't know a great deal about the physics either, but I can add and subtract, and the more excess delta v you have approaching the moon, the more the more you have to get rid of to get into lunar orbit, or even more importantly if you should need to abort the mission...

[prometheus]

If we ever get a new spacecraft design into production, there will STILL be no one on Earth that will be able to equal the US.

I'll go with that for now, but don't rest on your laurels...  There are plenty of folk going to be getting into this kind of stuff in the next few decades when it starts to generate that dirty word that gets us all a little horny...  Profit! 

[J. Carney]

Like I said... I don't know the physics, and I'm never going to... but there are people that DO know the physics that can make it happen if someone is willing to try it. I also know that since you hae neither astrophysics degree nor work for a space agence... well, you're still no more qualified than me to say "good idea" or "bad idea".

Just to make this clear,  I'm don't think you're a stupid guy by any means, I reckon you think pretty clearly, and bear in mind that TUS is on your side and I could be the one who's talking out of leftfield... 

Sorry, this gave me a different impression.

Someone who takes risks to protect others to save lives or to push boundaries etc is a hero.

Someone who takes risks because he wants to shave a couple of days off a journey is a f*cking idiot...

You a good man, Prom... but your temper is ALMOST as bad as mine.

I'm not actually arguing that it is unfesiable to get their fast, simply that IMO it is a pointless risk with little or no benifit to it...  Getting into a spacecraft will always be risky, especially the Earth Orbit Injection from Launch, but there's no point in building unnecessary risk into the mission...

I guess that we have different definitions of 'unnecessary risk.' I say strapping a giant bottle rocket to your arse and shooting yourself into an environment devoid of the heat, oxygen and pressure necessary to maintain life is an 'unnecessary risk.' If you're already risking that much... well, why not up the ante?

That's like in Iraq... I got in trouble once for not wearing a neck guard on my flack jacket (it made it harder to scan the horizon if I couldn't move me neck). I figured that I was already exposing two arms, my face and everything from my belt-line to the bottom of my butt to enemy fire WITHOUT protection (and out of what WAS covered, only 50% was safe from a bullet)... well, what harm was exposing another 16 square inches? IF I was possibly able to do my job better by placing alittle more risk into the equation... well, it wasn't like I was safe to begin with.

I don't know a great deal about the physics either, but I can add and subtract, and the more excess delta v you have approaching the moon, the more the more you have to get rid of to get into lunar orbit, or even more importantly if you should need to abort the mission...

Which is why I'm such a fan of pre-positioned equipment... you don't have to send hunks of metal and plastic (or even MRE's) fast, just dependably.

[prometheus]

You a good man, Prom... but your temper is ALMOST as bad as mine.

Yeah, they should send us up in a Gemini Capsule and not let us re-enter until we've sorted ourselves out...  That could be fun...

[prometheus]

Which is why I'm such a fan of pre-positioned equipment... you don't have to send hunks of metal and plastic (or even MRE's) fast, just dependably.

yeah, I think that's a pretty good idea...  One mission to put a habitat module onto the Lunar surface, and another to set it up on the moon...  That worked pretty damn well on Skylab...  I've got a great video clip of one of the astronauts doing a load of high diving maneuvers in the Skylab dome...

[Tus-XC]

but our payload size has increased dramatically since then

I must have missed that mission to the moon...  It must have happened in the 90's during one of my alcoholic blackouts...

I was refering to our current HLEV, much more effecient than the saturn V as well as taking heavier payloads.  and the saturn V doesn't give any delta V other than what is neccesary to get it into a parking orbit and maintain said orbit.  remind me when i get back from break to make some pictures and scan them on here i think u'll see what i'm saying then lol. 

[prometheus]

but our payload size has increased dramatically since then

I must have missed that mission to the moon...  It must have happened in the 90's during one of my alcoholic blackouts...

I was refering to our current HLEV, much more effecient than the saturn V as well as taking heavier payloads.  and the saturn V doesn't give any delta V other than what is neccesary to get it into a parking orbit and maintain said orbit.  remind me when i get back from break to make some pictures and scan them on here i think u'll see what i'm saying then lol. 

I do see what you're saying, I'm not stupid you know...  All I'm saying is that I think a free return trajectory is the best compromise between speed and safety for a Lunar Mission...  The Saturn V did what it needed to do, and without any of the kind of technology in terms of high tensile plastic and light weight alloys that we have today...  Hell, my bicycle is made out of more sophisticated alloy than a Saturn V rocket, and my mobile phone is three or four orders of magnitude more powerful than the Apollo Guidance Computers...  The Saturn V Hardware and The Lunar Module did what it was meant to do pretty admirably, ie. to beat the Russians to the moon.

Whether we can go faster or not isn't the issue I'm talking about.  It's whether we should go faster...

[Tus-XC]

but our payload size has increased dramatically since then

I must have missed that mission to the moon...  It must have happened in the 90's during one of my alcoholic blackouts...

I was refering to our current HLEV, much more effecient than the saturn V as well as taking heavier payloads.  and the saturn V doesn't give any delta V other than what is neccesary to get it into a parking orbit and maintain said orbit.  remind me when i get back from break to make some pictures and scan them on here i think u'll see what i'm saying then lol. 

I do see what you're saying, I'm not stupid you know...  All I'm saying is that I think a free return trajectory is the best compromise between speed and safety for a Lunar Mission...

lol, not saying you are, its just easier for me to explain w/ diagrams.