Manned Spaceflight - the Next 30 Years

[Eric Mc]

Toaster said:

Then you cannot be aware of the BAE investment (Money and expertise) http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/news_02nov2015_re...

What makes you think I wasn't aware? That was all over the news a couple of weeks ago. They still need more money.

[Toaster]

Eric Mc said:

What makes you think I wasn't aware? That was all over the news a couple of weeks ago. They still need more money.

Eric I suggest that if you were really aware you would have mentioned the positive investment rather than saying they need investment, they now have it which contradicts you saying they need it, maybe you did see the news and forgot, it really isn't important.

The real point is that this is great news for UK industry and positive news for space exploration. This is a power unit that has the potential of getting Humans in to space easier, cheaper and potentially safer than other technologies.

Edited by Toaster on Monday 16th November 09:16

[Eric Mc]

For Christ's sake stop trying to pick me up on everything I say. You obviously have a bee in your bonnett about something.

Is your hobby trying to trip me up at every opportunity? If it is, I would suggest that you find something more productive to do with your time rather than sniping and bhing at me from the wings. You are effectively ruining this thread and I have a good mind to ask the mods to close it purely because of your behaviour.

Which is a real pity because other posters behave in a much more mannerly and constructive fashion.

[Toaster]

Fair enough Eric, firstly an apology for making you feel that way and will endeavour not to make them again but also in defence of my comments if you made them about the technology id be more than happy so as an example they have produced Ultra-Lightweight Heat Exchangers and Frost control when you had your 'Chat' was this discussed and here is another question what is the benefit of more investment of BAE

Edited by Toaster on Monday 16th November 09:54

[Eric Mc]

My last chat with them was a few airshows ago (probably 2004 or 2006) and they were being very cagey about how their engines were able to transition from jet to rocket. At that time they were reluctant to reveal too much because it has since been disclosed by Bond that they ran into Official Secrets Act problems following their original British Aerospace involvement in HOTOL.

There is a very good documentary on Skylon on youtube.

[Simpo Two]

Catatafish said:

You would only take moon materials back to earth if it was financially viable.

Indeed, and I'm struggling to think of what they may be. It has to be something that's not only (a) run out on Earth, (2) is effing expensive and essential, but (3) available (and findable!) on the Moon.

Catatafish said:

The moon will look the same if you mine the hell out of it

Well that is true enough, though I expect a 'lunar conservation' movement will spring up and try and stop it.

Meantime, let's enjoy Earth orbit some more. Back to 1961...

[MartG]

Simpo Two said:

Catatafish said:

You would only take moon materials back to earth if it was financially viable.

Indeed, and I'm struggling to think of what they may be. It has to be something that's not only (a) run out on Earth, (2) is effing expensive and essential, but (3) available (and findable!) on the Moon.

Helium3

[NNH]

Anybody read Voyage by Stephen Baxter? It's a look into how NASA might have reached Mars nearly 30 years ago.

[hidetheelephants]

MartG said:

Simpo Two said:

Catatafish said:

You would only take moon materials back to earth if it was financially viable.

Indeed, and I'm struggling to think of what they may be. It has to be something that's not only (a) run out on Earth, (2) is effing expensive and essential, but (3) available (and findable!) on the Moon.

Helium3

It's cheaper to collect tritium and wait for it to decay, if someone wants lots then it would be possible to come up with a reactor optimised to make loads of tritium.