Here is one you might like...Have NASA design a 50 passenger single stage habitat for civilian lunar colonization.
Wow this I kinda can get behind. I did not expect this from yellowdingo.
I guess the old saying even a broken watch is right once a day(or twice if there is no AM/PM indicator) is true.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Petitions like this demonstrate the vast ignorance of many petition writers.
Single stage? going strictly by the text, this means that they expect a rocket WITH ONLY ONE STAGE to not only launch from the ground, go to lunar orbit and land, but carry enough tonnage AND lifesupport to support a colony of fifty people, i.e. more cargo than carried by the Mayflower and Speedwell in total.
Do you all even have a clue as to what's being asked for in the engineering sense?!
This isn't a petition, it's a joke that demonstrates just how ignorant many space fanatics are.
I'm just raising the bar from the winged coffin they called a shuttle to something useful to the future - the 100 year spaceship.
|
|
I'm just raising the bar from the winged coffin they called a shuttle to something useful to the future - the 100 year spaceship.Petitions like this demonstrate the vast ignorance of many petition writers.
Single stage? going strictly by the text, this means that they expect a rocket WITH ONLY ONE STAGE to not only launch from the ground, go to lunar orbit and land, but carry enough tonnage AND lifesupport to support a colony of fifty people, i.e. more cargo than carried by the Mayflower and Speedwell in total.
Do you all even have a clue as to what's being asked for in the engineering sense?!
This isn't a petition, it's a joke that demonstrates just how ignorant many space fanatics are.
You're not raising any bar... you're just displaying that you know absolutely nothing about rocketry and the physical constraints of space travel, nor of efficient design. Because you simply don't do things that way. You do liftoff to orbit, then transfer to a ship that only operates in vacuum. The method you're advocating is extremely inefficient when it comes to moving people and mass to the moon. You move your cargo in ships that can be roughly boosted from Earth's surface using higher more efficient g force thrust then move your people on separate spacecraft. Similarly to go to Mars, you don't go there on the craft you're coming back home in, you send it there separately unmanned, and you make the air and fuel you need from materials on site.
It's unfair to call the shuttle a "winged coffin" because of the loss of two spacecraft. Space travel is an inherently RISKY buisness. You ride what is essentially a flying bomb, waiting for an excuse to ignite on liftoff, then subject yourself to a plasma blowtorch on the way back, and that's not counting all of the risks in between. One of the Russian spacecraft made a perfect automated landing in Siberia.... with the crew dead because of an air leak during re-entry. Apollo 1 burned on the...
Actually that's not why I called it a winged coffin. And I'm for one direction colonization - not return trip holidays. And its because of the massive amount of space-waste that I said a single stage vessel can serve as a habitat for its passengers.
|
|
As someone who has done actual 'rocket science', let me thumbs-up yellowdingo.
Materiel keeps us from realizing, with current engineering, YD's petition (along with lots of money), not science.
I love that the Japanese were already working on a single stage space craft...Lets see the USA do it better.
I'd still rather stick to that petition to naming that one planet Gensokyo.