Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 30 of 30
  1. #26
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    In your opinion, what is the best role for the US and other governments to play in advancements in space? Should NASA continue to exist and be funded? Is there any profit to be found in expanding into space? Other than satellites, should we really give a what goes on up there?
    In my opinion, these extremely large projects are what the federal government should be focusing on. Most the stuff the government gets involved in should be done by the states. The Apollo and Shuttle missions are probably the last good thing that government has done. Everything else just turns into over priced .

    If it's not outlined in the cons ution, the federal government should stay out of it, with few exceptions.

  2. #27
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    In my opinion, these extremely large projects are what the federal government should be focusing on. Most the stuff the government gets involved in should be done by the states. The Apollo and Shuttle missions are probably the last good thing that government has done. Everything else just turns into over priced .

    If it's not outlined in the cons ution, the federal government should stay out of it, with few exceptions.
    Uhm.. your first paragraph doesn't really jibe with your second.

    I'm pretty sure space travel isn't written about in the Cons ution, after all.

  3. #28
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    I can't honestly say there's "profit" to be found in expanding into space, with the HUGE exception of a possible lunar elevator being built, which would greatly decrease costs for sending things into space.
    There are other methods that were worked out and discussed in the early 70's that can realistically be done. Payoff is not likely yet for profit. In short, a solar powered linear accelerator is built on the Moon to launch a payload to one of the Lagrangian points between the Earth and Moon, where a space station would be built. This station would optionally send it to a Low Earth Orbit station by similar means, or directly to Earth. Space missions can then retrieve the payload at convenient timeframes, or it can even be fitted with retro rockets, heat shields, and chutes to drop in the desert. Different ways were discussed. I think the major problem is that no rare elements are on the moon, at least yet discovered in any usable quan y to use them instead of our resources here.

    In the later 70's, from my experience with the reduction of Aluminum and reading past articles describing the above, I used to think it would be great to build an aluminum reduction plant on the moon. Great solar power to do the electrolysis, and the byproduct is oxygen. Even if we never shipped all the aluminum we produced, it could also be used to build a moon community. The oxygen could then, over time, make an atmosphere on moon. As I leaned more of the sciences, I found this wasn't viable. The oxygen could be used for maintaining a livable environment in pressurized rooms, or even city. However, the moon doesn't have enough gravity to hold an atmosphere. It probably would cave on if it could. The solar winds blow any gasses off the moon.
    I could see where some people would say that space exploration/flight should be kept as a commercial activity, but I think there's some real-world security protection measures that have to be kept in mind as well. Satellites are a prime target to take down, after all.
    It might be commercial someday. Right now, I don't think there's much to do there. It's just useless to us other than maintaining a tide.

  4. #29
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Uhm.. your first paragraph doesn't really jibe with your second.

    I'm pretty sure space travel isn't written about in the Cons ution, after all.
    "with few exceptions."

  5. #30
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    moon or mars base makes sense, all you need is solar panels for energy electricity and something to convert the gas into h2o for underground bases...grow plants with hydroponic setups....lol sustainable yeh
    Making water on the moon is simple. You remove the oxygen from the various ores on the moon and store it. You collect and separate the hydrogen out of the solar wind, and combine. You now have water.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •