Americans need to get serious again about space! 11

[whotmewory]

I wanna toss my hat in for American getting serious again about space!

American's gotten a pretty black eye from industry shifts away from home, and now with chine being soooo good at aircraft manufacturing thanks to the traitorous folks at Boeing, seems to me there's one last area where - at least for now - America leads the way, and that's SPACE!

Sure would be great if GW or the next Prez would come out - like Kennedy - and say "Let's do this!"

In '69 with Armstrong kicking up dust on the Moon, Stanley Kubrick's "2001 Space Odyssey" was seemingly a No Brainer and a lot of us kids envisioned working for NASA and us being as far as Mars if not at leaset mining the Moon.

Something went wrong somewhere - now all we have is a junker shuttle and a program lacking vision.

Perhaps we ought to hassle our legislators about this screw up - so younger engineers have a field to work in in 2020.

Let's go for space again and leave the Earth to China!

Cheers!

 

[casseopeia]

'She Bangs' is a Ricky Martin song that William Hung sang on American Idol. Click on MadMango's link for William Hung above, then go to Music in the list on the left and scan the list of songs for all the versions of 'She Bangs' he has done. A quick sampling will reveal THEY ALL SOUND EXCTLY THE SAME.

Here's a link to the lyrics for the song, in case you need a bit of help understanding William's enuncation. And if you have never heard of William Hung....dude, you gotta get out more!

http://www.extractando.com/entretenimiento/musica/Martin_SheBangs_I.htm

"If you are going to walk on thin ice, you might as well dance!"

 

[Jabberwocky]

It's like I said in the second part, every problem you solve gets you that much closer to all other solutions.

Anyways, I'm all for Space expansionism over the Long Haul. Try thinking about it this way: Judge progress, since caveman days, as the ability to preserve the species against all threats. Modern medicine, food tech, power tech, all of that has basically just been for that reason. We are at a stage where if a catastrophic meteor collision (which we have proof of happening in the past) were to come for us on Earth, we at least have a small chance of seeing it coming.

I want to get us to the point where we have a chance of surviving such an event, get all of our eggs out of the same basket as it were. I'm not saying NASA as it is (full of bueracracy (as is the health care system)) is the one to do it, but Somebody should be.

Finally, what other Frontiers do we have left? The ocean is a good one, but what about after that?

 

[bioengr82]

time of death 4 Nov 05 16:36
[flush]

 

[MadMango]

We've only explored like 10% of the ocean, still lots to discover there. It still leaves us in the "same basket" if a killer asteroid were headed towards Earth.

Space exploration just isn't a means to find new places to live or exploit. It helps technology leap-frog existing technology by discoverying new methods and materials and applying these to problems here.

[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[BillPSU]

This whole discussion is centered around which technology we should be spending federal research dollars on. Currently there are billions being spent on research by private concerns so that companies can make many more billions of dollars. Examples are bio-medical research, computer development, plastics research, and a multitude of other research projects.
Beggar the reason health care costs so much is because of the research and improvements done in the last 40 years. 40 years ago if you had a heart attack you died. There wasn't coronary bypasses, artificial hearts, heart transplants. 40 years ago there weren't burn centers or ICU's. I had a brother die because of burns which today he would have survived along with a huge medical bill.
BJC you would not have known about "spaceship earth" except for space technology.
Space technology has not only added to material sciences but to many other cost saving and life saving technologies. Communication satellites are not only used for normal communication but also for search and rescue. Communication to trucks and ships for better routing and information sharing. GPS which is also a technology used for killing people but also for saving people. Satellite imagining for a myriad of functions.
Why do we have many of these technologies, because of space exploration in the 60's. Mundane products such as metallized mylar, sun reflective coatings, and velcro came out of space exploration. Inertial guidance systems, high speed data communication and planetary physics also came from space exploration.
Space exploration has brought us not only technology but also created the desire and will to do something beyond what we are capable of today. It is money well spent.

 

[BitTwiddler]

"China will make a manned moon landing at a proper time, around 2017," leading scientist Ouyang Ziyuan was quoted by the Southern Metropolis News as saying.

The United States unveiled a $104 billion plan in September to return Americans to the moon by 2018. Its Apollo program carried the first humans to the moon in 1969.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051104/sc_nm/energy_space_china_dc

The US is already one year behind in a twelve-year race.

The International Space Station was started by Ronald Reagan. "Tonight, I am directing NASA to develop a permanently manned space station and to do it within a decade." he said on January 25, 1984.

http://history.nasa.gov/reagan84.htm

The Space Station still is not finished. It may never be finished if the shuttle can't be fixed.

If we match our perfomance with the space station, we will need to obtain a Chinese stamp on our tourist visas to visit mankind's first lunar colony.

 

[kchida]

I'm sure many of you have read about this by now:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator

I hope I see this within my lifetime (let's see....I've got 60+ more years). I would even venture to say that the space elevator concept is far more feasible than a commercially-viable fusion reactor. What do you think?

 

[BillPSU]

Correct me if I am wrong but I have thought about the space elevator. The biggest issue is getting the material into space to build the space elevator. Lets assume that the concept will work. The elevator must be 22,000 miles long to reach a synchronous orbit. Lets say the elevator has a mass of 100 lbs per foot of length. 22,000 miles x 5280 ft/mile x 100lbs/ft= 11616000000lbs = 5,808,000 tons. I am really a dreamer about space but have a hard time understanding how to get this much material into space to build the space elevator. Asteroids could be moved into position or mined for the material but again this is another new technology. Other technical issues would be the wind velocity that the elevator would experience in the atmosphere, earthquakes at a ground attachment site, tides at a floating attachment site, energy delivery to the lift mechanism of the elevator and orbital changes of the planet with this much mass in orbit above the earth. I believe this may be a great idea but creates enormous other technology issues.

 

[kchida]

Here's another article from an engineer's point of view:

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/aug05/1690

Also, how did you figure a linear mass density of 100 lbs/ft. At the moment, a proof of concept hasn't even been established. It is said that within as little as 5 years, the feasibility of a space elevator will be determined. The primary obstacle is in developing and manufacturing the carbon nanotube tether.

I don't claim to be an expert on this subject, nor do I follow it religiously, but I can definitely say that it would tremendously impact humanity.

 

[GregLocock]

kchida, maybe you need to check out the laws of spacecraft design, one of which says

"10. When in doubt, estimate. In an emergency, guess. But be sure to go back and clean up the mess when the real numbers come along."

Bill guessed. He came up with a huge final resulting mass. I think his guess was wrong, for all sorts of reasons, but at least it has given a context for answers. We aren't talking about spaceship technology, we are talking about a functioning manufaturing base in space of the same order of magnitude as the entire automobile industry of the USA.

That being said I am in favour of pursuing the space elevator.



Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[TheTick]

I think "serious about space" AND "manned mission to Mars" are not compatible concepts. We need to crawl before we run.

"Getting serious" would first mean developing safe (for people, cargo, and planet's environment) and economical means for popping in and out of orbit, and maintaining a viable and useful manned presence in orbit. Ultimately, it needs to be profitable, which means no NASA needs to find a comfy chair in the back of the history books.

I could be the world's greatest underachiever, if I could just learn to apply myself.

http://www.EsoxRepublic.com

-SolidWorks API VB programming help

 

[davefitz]

BillPSU is corect, but I would like to add that the original reason for the 1960's space rush to the moon likely had a different reason.

At that time (1960), there was a growing consensus in gov't that we needed to improve rocket launch technology in order to realize an effective nuclear deterrent. At that time, the failure rate of US rockets was of concern and marginally competitive the the Russians.

Not only did the huge amount of research dollars point the US universities in the direction of supporting the goal of better launch vehicles, but JFK's verbage added a vision that was probably in the minds of many college science students, and that vision ( of flying to the moon) was probably a more attractive thought than the real reason, ie, building a bigger and better strategic missile system. The vison thing worked, and there was a huge increase in science and engineering students in the 60's.

The missile and space industry is now mature and does not need the same jump-start as was required in 1960, but it needs to address the normal issues of regeneration of staff as the grey hairs retire. There are other technology fields that might need a jump start, but it is hard to imagine that anyone in gov't feels as strongly about those new issues as was felt in 1960 regarding the "missile gap".

 

[whotmewory]

Thank you BillPSU for your very lively adds to this discussion!

What astounds me is all the "logic" banter among so many of you: dollars, dollars, dollars! Where is all your sense of "challenge" and "adventure?" Have you been scrambling away at the rat race too long to sit back and star at the sky at night and allow yourselves to think about "what's out there?"

I'm not at all suggesting Federal dollars alone pay for this - private enterprise will take us farther and faster: it just has to have some assistance for the investment.

But for those of you "rational" thinkers out there - without even looking at the "hot button" social programs or corporate welfare programs our media hypes every election year - please PLEASE consider the "unheard-of" of OUR dollars. For example, while WE cannot even get forgiven a couple thousand dollars in back 401-K early withdrawal penalties or back taxes or whatever, WE somehow can ALWAYS and CERTAINLY afford to FORGIVE India's $4B debt to YOU and ME, or the BILLIONS in debt owed to us by so many other countries - 1st, 2nd, or 3rd world.

THAT'S where the money can come from: those who OWE you and me.

Chris in NC NASCAR Country

 

[whotmewory]

$%^*((#$#! Blasted spell check!

 

[Beggar]

Or better:

Don't forgive public debt AND don't waste money on NASA. How 'bout retiring some of our own public debt?

--------------------
Bring back the HP-15

http://www.hp15c.org

--------------------

 

[TheTick]

What astounds me is all the "logic" banter among so many of you: dollars, dollars, dollars! Where is all your sense of "challenge" and "adventure?"

Isabella did not finance Columbus out of the goodness of her heart, nor did Columbus venture forth merely for the thrill of it.

Are we not trained to discern the driving forces behind what we wish to achieve? As a driving force, money moves from where it is to where there is more money to be made. "Serious about space" also means being serious about mastering the economic forces that will put us there.

 

[whotmewory]

Nor did Columbus "discover" North America. When will the schools stop that nonsense?

How can any people stare at the Moon or at Mars or Saturn in a scope and - knowing we've ste foot on that dusty ball in our sky - shrug it off as not being a totally tossed off opportunity shamefully forgotten and wasted?

There are so mnany driving factors behind every "adventure" of humankind (PC term there). NASA this - NASA that. Get off the NASA thing. They're not the only option.

 

[GolfMeeting]

NASA does have competition these days at OSIDA.

Look at what those Oklahoman's are doing at OSIDA:

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/ok_spaceport_011210.html

Whats next, nuclear power plants in space, mining the moon and Mars, launching mini-planets from mars back near earth's orbit for inhabitation?

 

[wes616]

We are at a point where our scientific dollars need to be spent carefully, since they decrease on an almost. The orbital program needs to be privatized and replaced. The last century we saw a rise in big defense contractors like bechtel and Haliburton, this century we'll see a rise in the private space companies. The first one to get a man (or men) in an orbit where satallite mantenance can occur will make oogles of money in the next few years. Then our govt. can award these companies big contracts to keep our fleets of sats flying and can spend the science dollars on genuine (non "immediately" commercial) ventures.

Hell, maybe we can even sell the "space station" to a "pharmasutical company consortium"!

Wes C.
------------------------------
In this house, we OBEY the laws of thermodynamics! - Homer Simpson

 

[Guest0527211403]

C'mon folks... get with the program. Google is way a head of everybody!

http://www.google.com/jobs/lunar_job.html