Computers, Gaming, & Technology Here you can talk about anything with circuit boards, or dilithium crystals, or flux capacitors. Show off your technology, computing, and gaming knowledge.

Last Space Shuttle Discovery Launch Today

Thread Tools
 
Old Feb 25, 2011 | 03:19 PM
  #11  
187sks's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,515
Likes: 2
From: Lacey, WA
Vehicle: Two Accents, Mini, Miata, Van, Outback, and a ZX-6
Default

Wrench sized items don't require map sharing, they're accurately tracked by radar.



Safety is a huge concern. I mean this IS rocket science after all.
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2011 | 10:11 AM
  #12  
Stocker's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,795
Likes: 5
From: Pflugerville, TX
Vehicle: 2000 Elantra
Default

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/sc...=2&ref=science
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2011 | 12:59 PM
  #13  
nos4atu's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
From: Red Deer
Vehicle: 2012 mitsubishi eclipse spyder gs, 2001 hyundai tiburon
Default

What bothers me is that they haven't been able to produce a means of propulsion to replace the solid state rockets that have been in use since the Saturn V program, 44 years ago.
Reply
Old Mar 1, 2011 | 01:40 PM
  #14  
187sks's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,515
Likes: 2
From: Lacey, WA
Vehicle: Two Accents, Mini, Miata, Van, Outback, and a ZX-6
Default

There are some great new propulsion systems which work in space, but they're too weak to actually launch a vehicle they're only useful once already in orbit.



The biggest problem is that it takes a huge amount of energy to get into orbit from Earth. No matter what, that amount of energy will cost quite a bit.



Sure, there is potential for gravity canceling devices which would make it easy and inexpensive, but assuming that's even possible we are a long ways from anything that revolutionary. The easiest way to lower launch costs is to limit launches from Earth while increasing space exploration. How? Have people living in space. I'm not talking about the ISS or other low Earth orbit space stations, I'm talking large Lagrangian point space stations and asteroid/Mars/Moon bases. Asteroids make the most sense from a raw materials point of view, many of the materials which are difficult to mine on Earth are basically floating around in large nuggets just waiting to be fed into an automated machine and refined. A lot of materials extremely rare (and very expensive) on Earth can be gathered and jettisoned down to the planet to fund the exploration and make the people leading this charge extremely rich.



I would live on a Martian or Moon base. I know there are other people like me. Even if it meant I never got to come back to Earth I would go.
Reply
Old Mar 2, 2011 | 11:26 AM
  #15  
Stocker's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,795
Likes: 5
From: Pflugerville, TX
Vehicle: 2000 Elantra
Default

Aw hell no, unless I could be King/autocrat
Reply
Old Mar 5, 2011 | 11:26 AM
  #16  
Stocker's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,795
Likes: 5
From: Pflugerville, TX
Vehicle: 2000 Elantra
Default

http://dvice.com/archives/2011/03/orbital-garbage.php
Reply
Old Mar 5, 2011 | 04:04 PM
  #17  
187sks's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12,515
Likes: 2
From: Lacey, WA
Vehicle: Two Accents, Mini, Miata, Van, Outback, and a ZX-6
Default

That would make a great investment.
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2011 | 06:34 AM
  #18  
StrikeEagle's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,881
Likes: 0
From: Huntsville, AL
Vehicle: 2001/Hyundai/Tiburon
Default



Wall-E?????





As much space junk as out there, it's actually sooooo little compared with the vastness of space. There's so many different altitudes, directions, and speeds that things travel, even with the large quantity of debris, collisions are still very rare. That being said, I think it's good to catch these things early. Just going to be very hard to get govt funding for it, if that's what they're after.
Reply




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:27 PM.