So, I saw a show on the discovery channel a while back about this rocket system called DIRECT. It was designed by a guy who didn't work for nasa. It offered a way to reach mars using current technology for 1/100 of the price of the current idea nasa has which includes building a space station on the moon and launching from it ( the amount of fuel needed to reach mars weighs to much to get it off the ground on earth).
Anyways, this guy's idea is to send a nuclear reactor to mars. It would then convert the air on mars to methane. Three years later we send a rocket to mars with only enough fuel to reach it. Before we even launch one person there is already a rocket on mars waiting to send our people back. In theory it seems like a great system. There are a lot more details available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIRECT if you're interested in this type of thing.
The problem is NIH. Not invented here. Nasa can't take credit for the idea and scrapped it. Somehow this has reached back into the news and these same guys are trying to convince Obama to scrap nasa's overbudget current plans and use this. Get humans to mars.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,513231,00.html
DIRECT
Moderator: Dictators in Training
Re: DIRECT
Naethyn wrote:( the amount of fuel needed to reach mars weighs to much to get it off the ground on earth)
i never thought about that in all my life. i just wondered why we weren't on mars yet
Re: DIRECT
They have little robot probes on Mars so I'm not sure that's true.
Re: DIRECT
We are not on Mars because its is not profitable to us at this time. We are more concerned with fighting the current war, preparing for the next war and such to be bothered with science exploration for the purpose of science. At the same time, we don't want anyone in the private sector doing this either because if does turn out to be profitable, we want to unsure that the US gov't is in control over it.
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
Re: DIRECT
Zanchief wrote:They have little robot probes on Mars so I'm not sure that's true.
isn't that like comparing driving a hybrid cross-country to driving a semi?
Re: DIRECT
Those little robots don't have to get back!
Maeya wrote:And then your head just aches from having your hair pulled so tight for so long...
Re: DIRECT
I think it will be commercially "affordable" within our lifetime.
How do you like this spoiler, motherfucker? -Lyion
Re: DIRECT
I do too, actually.
I don't think we'll have a space elevator in our lifetime, our materials science just isn't good enough yet, but I think we'll see major advances in space flight by about 2050 or so.
-Arlos
I don't think we'll have a space elevator in our lifetime, our materials science just isn't good enough yet, but I think we'll see major advances in space flight by about 2050 or so.
-Arlos
Re: DIRECT
If we put support behind the private sector in space advancement, we will see remarkable achievements within our lifetime, the whole key is to support the private sector and not try and hinder them.
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
Re: DIRECT
There has to be profit to support private sector space advancement, and I don't think taking people into space will be sufficient. Too bad the moon appears to have little to no resources of value.
Last edited by KaiineTN on Thu Apr 09, 2009 3:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: DIRECT
Moons, not much, perhaps.
Asteroid belt: massive amounts of useful stuff.
Also, space has amazing potential for materials research as well as biochem research. There are alloys that can only be created in microgravity in orbit because they'd separate out on earth. Also, microbes grow differently, chemicals can be created differently, etc. etc. etc. The problem is, the cost to put stuff into orbit is SO high right now that it's not economically viable yet to get to industrial-scale production levels.
Once we come up with a faster, cheaper and safer method of getting at least cargo into orbit, we'll see an explosion of commercial development.
Once concept I've heard that could work, at least theoretically, is a mass driver system. If you combine a mass driver with a vehicle with its own thrust, you can do low end boost with the mass driver and then have it lift off the rest of the way on it's own, and apparently this can be built in the near future largely using off-the-shelf Maglev components. Doing that with passengers is more problematic, as to prevent lethal G-forces, you have to build a launch system literally 100 miles long, but for cargo, you could basically make a circular tube in a much smaller area.
-Arlos
Asteroid belt: massive amounts of useful stuff.
Also, space has amazing potential for materials research as well as biochem research. There are alloys that can only be created in microgravity in orbit because they'd separate out on earth. Also, microbes grow differently, chemicals can be created differently, etc. etc. etc. The problem is, the cost to put stuff into orbit is SO high right now that it's not economically viable yet to get to industrial-scale production levels.
Once we come up with a faster, cheaper and safer method of getting at least cargo into orbit, we'll see an explosion of commercial development.
Once concept I've heard that could work, at least theoretically, is a mass driver system. If you combine a mass driver with a vehicle with its own thrust, you can do low end boost with the mass driver and then have it lift off the rest of the way on it's own, and apparently this can be built in the near future largely using off-the-shelf Maglev components. Doing that with passengers is more problematic, as to prevent lethal G-forces, you have to build a launch system literally 100 miles long, but for cargo, you could basically make a circular tube in a much smaller area.
-Arlos
Re: DIRECT
there are plenty of useful moons in our solar system
Re: DIRECT
Evermore wrote:i would bet magnatizm is the answer
lol wut?
the answer is clearly finding stargates
Re: DIRECT
They might as well throw a few trillion into this sector, theyre already wasting it on every other godamn thing possible