I have my Vision of Space exploration too . It's too complex to explain in a forum and because it , i will explain it in two talks to ISDC 2010 in Chicago ( hoping for acceptance of talks themselves ) If someone is interested , in my site www.carloartemi.it there is a banner " Go to Mars " ( in the English version of site ) with an outline of Vision or , better speaking , of a manned Mars mission to build and operate a low cost outspot on that planet . Also if English isn't my mother language I think to have been clear to description of mission itself
- Status
Nice site, i just can't find any such article ?artemiit":3067iipp said:
Could you please give a direct link ?
docm":1t9jyxqo said:
I haven't posted in a long while, but the new NASA budget seems to have brought up a lot of discussion.
The problem I have with all these visions is that they are founded on a very unstable base. We don't have a good way to get to LEO. We are still using the same technology from the Mercury Project days. Essentially this is what Spacex is re-creating with there Falcon/Dragon program. Sure it will use newer technology for some things, but the very essence of the technology has not changed much at all. Just a further refinement which will only net minor incremental improvements and continue to limit the amount of cargo and people send to space. The problem is that we are still highly dependent on chemical rockets and they have not improved significantly over the past 50 years to cause a shift in our thoughts of getting into space. Until we get beyond chemical rockets or see an order of magnitude improvement in their performance, we will be here 50 years from now asking the same questions about our vision for space exploration.
What work or portion of the new NASA budget is dedicated to creating a true revolution in propulsion systems to LEO? What if any private research is being done to address these particular problems?
A World Space Consortium made of business, government and organizations to Mars. This is a way that aims to spark the global high tech economy, incite ingenuity and jobs, along with a route of global cooperation. Mars mission by 2020. Anyone else seeing that the time of National space endeavor as dead, and seek inspiration, believe in a cooperative effort, and join the cause getting word to world.
www.worldspaceorganization.com
www.worldspaceorganization.com
My vision for Space Exploration is to put exploration into the back burner for now and re-prioritize all our Space efforst towards Space Settlement and Colonization.
Once we have a firm and permanent foothold in space we can explore to our heart's content and will have opened many new methods and opportunities to do so.
I am not saying that we should completely abandon the relatively limited exploration that we can do with existing Earth based technolgy. Only that Exploration provides a lot of scientific knowleged but very little in terms of concrete, measurable benefits to us poor Earth bound beings. Let's fuflifll our destiny as the species designed to take life to its next evolutionary state where it is no longer dependent on the surface of a hospitable planet but is spread throught the Solar System and eventually everywhere that humans can reach. In teh process of doiing that we will bring incredible riches in terms of energy, resources, and expanding living space that will benefit all of Humanity for the eons to come.
Once we have a firm and permanent foothold in space we can explore to our heart's content and will have opened many new methods and opportunities to do so.
I am not saying that we should completely abandon the relatively limited exploration that we can do with existing Earth based technolgy. Only that Exploration provides a lot of scientific knowleged but very little in terms of concrete, measurable benefits to us poor Earth bound beings. Let's fuflifll our destiny as the species designed to take life to its next evolutionary state where it is no longer dependent on the surface of a hospitable planet but is spread throught the Solar System and eventually everywhere that humans can reach. In teh process of doiing that we will bring incredible riches in terms of energy, resources, and expanding living space that will benefit all of Humanity for the eons to come.
If I was Obama and could press it through congress:
1. Kill the current stimulus and jobs bills. Instead, introduce a 'New Horizons Act' which re-appropriates the funds to seed money into American private and public industries that are space-centric. More launches from America. More American industry making rockets, hiring scientists, and so on.
2. With the ~$500b in federal funding for the space industry, use some funding to build the first space elevator, giving America a huge competitive edge on space travel. Use other funds to build up private industries by funneling cash through grants and competitions.
3. Get America back to the moon, privately. Offer a major case-based competition to spur development towards the moon.
4. Incorporate a 'home port tax' for all space-based industry with America as its port of call. Something small - maybe 5-10%. This would ensure that money-generating industry outside of Earth, that is distinctly American based brings in some minor federal revenue.
5. Profit. With space-based industries creating new goods and services, cruise into the 21st century knowing that America has become something greater than a superpower.
That is what I'd do
1. Kill the current stimulus and jobs bills. Instead, introduce a 'New Horizons Act' which re-appropriates the funds to seed money into American private and public industries that are space-centric. More launches from America. More American industry making rockets, hiring scientists, and so on.
2. With the ~$500b in federal funding for the space industry, use some funding to build the first space elevator, giving America a huge competitive edge on space travel. Use other funds to build up private industries by funneling cash through grants and competitions.
3. Get America back to the moon, privately. Offer a major case-based competition to spur development towards the moon.
4. Incorporate a 'home port tax' for all space-based industry with America as its port of call. Something small - maybe 5-10%. This would ensure that money-generating industry outside of Earth, that is distinctly American based brings in some minor federal revenue.
5. Profit. With space-based industries creating new goods and services, cruise into the 21st century knowing that America has become something greater than a superpower.
That is what I'd do
With the recent announcement, the US has said that we spent the seed money for this industry, it is time for private companies to take over. In addition we have certain needs that will serve as a continued source of funding.
1. Unmanned Space Science. Maintain all current observatories, and all planned observatories for the following reasons. The US gets a good return on these space dollars.
a. basic science
b earth protection
2. Tourism. There is no remarkable reason to go to the moon, except for tourism. Let SpaceX and Bigelow go for it. As an add on, companies will lease space for research, as will the US and other countries.
3. Asteroid and Comet killers need to be cataloged and if any issues come up, research into a earth survival needs to be funded.
4. Research
a. LEO, continue the ISS as long as there are reasons to do research there. Rent it out as needed to private companies. The Hubble is the model. If there is a need for the ISS it will be maintained indefinitely. The ISS is modular. As one module goes bad, it can be replaced. Of note, Russia is ALREADY building the modules needed to link to IT's portion of the ISS that will be detached in a few years. Letting that go forward and de orbitting the ISS would be a waste.
b. La Grange points - if folks want to go then set up a space station there.
c. The Moon - ditto. The W reasons for going were false. It was a China moon race reaction. That said, folks DO want to go. The US does NOT have to fund all of it since tourists DO want to go. The research will come along, and perhaps be a huge portion of the traffic. Moon bases SHOULD be UNDERGROUND, and probably in a cave or crater. Just think if the tourist concept had been in the minds of folks in the late 60's. The space industry would be MUCH bigger now.
d. From what I understand, we do not have the technology to get someone to deep space safely. I would do research into that problem, along with the other needed technologies. It seems to me that MULTIPLE launches would allow you to assemble the needed vessel, but net, net, it would HAVE to be HUGE.
e. Exotic propulsion - We need this, it needs to be funded.
f. LEO debris must be solved. The research into this MUST be taken to a usable platform in the not too distant future. This technology is by definition, anti satellite technology. That is an interesting topic, but well, we need to get rid of the LEO debris.
The future of the US and the world in space is bright. THIS is the SECOND SPACE RACE. THE US will participate, but in a different way. Point to point suborbital travel alone will lead to more jobs then the current space industry. Albeit many of the jobs will be airline type jobs.
1. Unmanned Space Science. Maintain all current observatories, and all planned observatories for the following reasons. The US gets a good return on these space dollars.
a. basic science
b earth protection
2. Tourism. There is no remarkable reason to go to the moon, except for tourism. Let SpaceX and Bigelow go for it. As an add on, companies will lease space for research, as will the US and other countries.
3. Asteroid and Comet killers need to be cataloged and if any issues come up, research into a earth survival needs to be funded.
4. Research
a. LEO, continue the ISS as long as there are reasons to do research there. Rent it out as needed to private companies. The Hubble is the model. If there is a need for the ISS it will be maintained indefinitely. The ISS is modular. As one module goes bad, it can be replaced. Of note, Russia is ALREADY building the modules needed to link to IT's portion of the ISS that will be detached in a few years. Letting that go forward and de orbitting the ISS would be a waste.
b. La Grange points - if folks want to go then set up a space station there.
c. The Moon - ditto. The W reasons for going were false. It was a China moon race reaction. That said, folks DO want to go. The US does NOT have to fund all of it since tourists DO want to go. The research will come along, and perhaps be a huge portion of the traffic. Moon bases SHOULD be UNDERGROUND, and probably in a cave or crater. Just think if the tourist concept had been in the minds of folks in the late 60's. The space industry would be MUCH bigger now.
d. From what I understand, we do not have the technology to get someone to deep space safely. I would do research into that problem, along with the other needed technologies. It seems to me that MULTIPLE launches would allow you to assemble the needed vessel, but net, net, it would HAVE to be HUGE.
e. Exotic propulsion - We need this, it needs to be funded.
f. LEO debris must be solved. The research into this MUST be taken to a usable platform in the not too distant future. This technology is by definition, anti satellite technology. That is an interesting topic, but well, we need to get rid of the LEO debris.
The future of the US and the world in space is bright. THIS is the SECOND SPACE RACE. THE US will participate, but in a different way. Point to point suborbital travel alone will lead to more jobs then the current space industry. Albeit many of the jobs will be airline type jobs.
One thing that needs to be made sure to happen is that we dont do the apolo method of getting to the moon. If your gonna go to the moon build a space ship. Made just for space and that can be refueled and tow a signifigant amount. Doesnt have to land its just a carrier vehicle.
I do think we need a small lifting body craft that can seat anywhere from 7 to 12 people and be lifted from the surface to orbit and back on a regular timely basis without needing to cost hundreds of millions per launch. Hell id be pissed if its more than 50 mil by the time a few are up and running.
Dont make it a mini space station. Dont make it carry satelites just people and maybe supplies. Dont for the love of god make it with tiles again i beg you.
Just make it a little space truck.
I do think we need a small lifting body craft that can seat anywhere from 7 to 12 people and be lifted from the surface to orbit and back on a regular timely basis without needing to cost hundreds of millions per launch. Hell id be pissed if its more than 50 mil by the time a few are up and running.
Dont make it a mini space station. Dont make it carry satelites just people and maybe supplies. Dont for the love of god make it with tiles again i beg you.
Just make it a little space truck.
My vision would be somthing like:
We choose not to go directly to the Moon.
Lets instead build the highway to space!
Not because it is hard (expensive), but because it is easier (cheaper).
1. LEO spaceships (taxi & cargo):
NASA should support the commercial companies in building many different LEO taxi and cargo ships.
I would love to see a Dragon, SpaceShip Tree (or Four), DreamChaser, New Shepard, Orion Lite and what else working at the same time. Should we say arround 2014...
At the same time NASA should research different ways to make LEO taxi & cargo cheaper.
2. In-space spaceships and spacetugs.
I love the idea of fuel depotes, so we don't need huge rockets, and NASA should make the pathway for this to work.
After that, we can have Spacetugs etc. going arround the solarsystem with people and cargo.
Of course VASMIR is very important in this field, and need to get all the support possible.
3. Landers (moon, Mars and astroides).
When we have all the infrastructor in place, we can think of landers, not sure if the moon or astroides would be the best first target.
We choose not to go directly to the Moon.
Lets instead build the highway to space!
Not because it is hard (expensive), but because it is easier (cheaper).
1. LEO spaceships (taxi & cargo):
NASA should support the commercial companies in building many different LEO taxi and cargo ships.
I would love to see a Dragon, SpaceShip Tree (or Four), DreamChaser, New Shepard, Orion Lite and what else working at the same time. Should we say arround 2014...
At the same time NASA should research different ways to make LEO taxi & cargo cheaper.
2. In-space spaceships and spacetugs.
I love the idea of fuel depotes, so we don't need huge rockets, and NASA should make the pathway for this to work.
After that, we can have Spacetugs etc. going arround the solarsystem with people and cargo.
Of course VASMIR is very important in this field, and need to get all the support possible.
3. Landers (moon, Mars and astroides).
When we have all the infrastructor in place, we can think of landers, not sure if the moon or astroides would be the best first target.
voyager4d":3sk1ufjm said:
I think a good idea would be to get the O2 and silica from the moon using a small mining and processing facility. Use asteroids for H2O heavy metals, rare earths etc.
Eventually just turn a good sized asteroid into a shipyard complex. Could use the inside as a station/mining/refinery facility.
Guys, I am not sure about the merits of a propellant depot. You would have to launch the propellant from Earth, right? Does not defeat the purpose of the depot?
You could have a depot on the Moon, manufacturing the fuel there, but according to Dr. Robert Zubrin in the book The Case for Mars, the Delta-V requirement for stopping at the Moon and then going to Mars from there is higher than simply going straight to Mars.
Zubrin's Mars Direct plan uses craft which have only the fuel to go one way to Mars, and the fuel for the return trip is generated on Mars by a robotic craft launched 2 years earlier (you don't send the humans until you are reasonably sure that the return propellant has been generated).
--Brian
You could have a depot on the Moon, manufacturing the fuel there, but according to Dr. Robert Zubrin in the book The Case for Mars, the Delta-V requirement for stopping at the Moon and then going to Mars from there is higher than simply going straight to Mars.
Zubrin's Mars Direct plan uses craft which have only the fuel to go one way to Mars, and the fuel for the return trip is generated on Mars by a robotic craft launched 2 years earlier (you don't send the humans until you are reasonably sure that the return propellant has been generated).
--Brian
neutrino78x":1gz2o4yr said:
That is an intelligent question if you havent met the concept before. Search around for some thread specifically on propellant depots and you can probably find a rationale.
I think these are the key points:
* Propellent Depots let you launch a much larger vehicle without having to build a much larger launcher and without complicated assembly in orbit, because most of the mass is generally in the fuel.
* The rockets to launch the fuel can be much cheaper, because the only thing that matters is $/kg. Its ok if a few fail, and rockets of any size and shape can be used, unlike the rocket that launches the people or the craft, which must not fail and cannot be easily swapped with any other rocket.
* Because of the simple requirements, it is possible to shop around for the cheapest, ie have competition between multiple companies.
neutrino78x":2xg0t678 said:
Let me put it this way, we are building the highway to space, and we don't want to drive arround in big gasoline trucks. Because we don't have rockets big enough to lift that.
What is the answer to that problem?
Gas stations (fuel depots) of course.
And yes the fuel will initially come from the earth, but we can use the cheapest rocket we can find for the delivery.
Over time the fuel will hopefully come from the moon and asteroides.
Btw. this topic is for visions not for na' sayers.
MannyPim":884p84ed said:
That sums up the problem pretty well. We, the technically savvy and aware types, think of space exploration as sending probes to Pluto, or more landers to Mars, whereas most of the people think that space exploration is anything that we do in space. They don't realize that we are already learning how to live there, and doing work there. We need to make it clear to people what the difference is, because they don't see any point in sending probes to Pluto when we haven't done a darn thing on the Moon. They are not aware of the advances that have been made in space station construction, the research which is going on in materials processing, the experience we are gaining in keeping people alive for long periods off-planet.
I like those posts which emphasize work in LEO and towards a Lunar base. I agree completely.
What we really need to do for the next few decades is to take the word "Exploration" away from the word "Space!" We have explored all we need to for a while, now we need to get some practical work done with all the stuff we've learned and found while exploring. Building things like bigger, better space stations, refueling spots in orbit, better launch vehicles along with a way to put stuff in orbit (mass driver) without needing rockets. True, a mass driver would not be good for humans, we would still need some rockets. But a "fuel-less" launch system is essential for putting all types of materials, supplies, consumables, etc into orbit, ultimately saving us trillions in launch costs.
Mars should be put on the back, back, back burner for now. Once we have established better launch systems and have orbital and lunar bases where we have mining and industrial building capability, then we can start thinking about Mars again. The next few decades won't be "glamorous" or fun, but hard work rarely is. And we have a lot of work to do before we can start looking outward and start thinking about Exploration again.
I think it is great that Private Industry is getting into the act. I also like that there are more nations getting involved as well.
What we really need to do for the next few decades is to take the word "Exploration" away from the word "Space!" We have explored all we need to for a while, now we need to get some practical work done with all the stuff we've learned and found while exploring. Building things like bigger, better space stations, refueling spots in orbit, better launch vehicles along with a way to put stuff in orbit (mass driver) without needing rockets. True, a mass driver would not be good for humans, we would still need some rockets. But a "fuel-less" launch system is essential for putting all types of materials, supplies, consumables, etc into orbit, ultimately saving us trillions in launch costs.
Mars should be put on the back, back, back burner for now. Once we have established better launch systems and have orbital and lunar bases where we have mining and industrial building capability, then we can start thinking about Mars again. The next few decades won't be "glamorous" or fun, but hard work rarely is. And we have a lot of work to do before we can start looking outward and start thinking about Exploration again.
I think it is great that Private Industry is getting into the act. I also like that there are more nations getting involved as well.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 189
-
-
This Christmas Eve, humans will try to embrace a star
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 6
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 38
-
-
Aurora alert: Geomagnetic storm could spark northern lights in upper Midwest skies this Christmas
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram