Space Launch System - Orion
Discussion
Beati Dogu said:
Rocket cargo capacity expressed in whales.
Courtesy of ULA.
I'm sure Musk will be responding with something pithy, probably involving Falcon Heavy lifting a 60,000kg bowl of Petunias to low earth orbit - stick the same bowl of Petunias on an Atlas V and the booster would just collapse on the launch pad (with the the Petunias thinking 'Oh No, Not Again...)Courtesy of ULA.
TheFlyingBanana said:
Personally, I think the focus should be on establishing a large moon base, with manufacturing facilities.
The moon is our perfect launch point for proper long-term exploration and development of the solar system. Robotic manufacturing will enable the construction of spacecraft in low gravity, and thus ultimately the challenge of launcing them becomes far easier.
The fact that the Earth has a single, large, resource rich moon within relatively easy reach is a major plus for the future of our species and the long term exploration and exploitation of space.
Launhing from the moon could be done by rocket (far less fuel and power needed), or even by electromagnetic sled or other means. Once properly established a lunar base would become our gateway to the entire solar system.
While I love your optimism, the real main benefit of a colony on the Moon is the distance, if stuff goes pear shaped, you're not waiting up to 3 years for a rescue, The moon is our perfect launch point for proper long-term exploration and development of the solar system. Robotic manufacturing will enable the construction of spacecraft in low gravity, and thus ultimately the challenge of launcing them becomes far easier.
The fact that the Earth has a single, large, resource rich moon within relatively easy reach is a major plus for the future of our species and the long term exploration and exploitation of space.
Launhing from the moon could be done by rocket (far less fuel and power needed), or even by electromagnetic sled or other means. Once properly established a lunar base would become our gateway to the entire solar system.
MartG said:
Eric - that was his point. Compared to a mars mission ...
I responded to the wording in his comment - rather than the quote he included. I assumed he was talking about flights to the moon rather than Mars.So what if a rescue mission takes years. It's no worse than trying to get to Australia in the late 18th Century. We need to readjust out time scales and expectations to a pre mid 19th century setting.
Prior to the advent of the railway and the telegraph (mid 19th century) travel and communications took months and even years. Space travel reintroduces us to something we have kind of forgotten - but which was the norm for most of humanity's history.
http://www.anmm.gov.au/Learn/Library-and-Research/...
109 days for the earliest regular trips to Australia
109 days for the earliest regular trips to Australia
Flooble said:
http://www.anmm.gov.au/Learn/Library-and-Research/...
109 days for the earliest regular trips to Australia
And most of those passengers were never coming back.109 days for the earliest regular trips to Australia
Eric Mc said:
MartG said:
Eric - that was his point. Compared to a mars mission ...
I responded to the wording in his comment - rather than the quote he included. I assumed he was talking about flights to the moon rather than Mars.So what if a rescue mission takes years. It's no worse than trying to get to Australia in the late 18th Century. We need to readjust out time scales and expectations to a pre mid 19th century setting.
Prior to the advent of the railway and the telegraph (mid 19th century) travel and communications took months and even years. Space travel reintroduces us to something we have kind of forgotten - but which was the norm for most of humanity's history.
OK on the moon, it would depend on how much reserve air you had, but you could survive without water and/or food for a couple of days.
You wouldn't last 3 years though.
Seems the schedule shakeup, with more Block 1 launches, may impact the Europa Clipper mission which was due to fly on the Block 1B. Launching on the less powerful Block 1 will probably mean a different flightpath will be needed, including a gravitational assist at some point.
http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/missions/human-s...
http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/missions/human-s...
smilie 
MartG said:
Beati Dogu said:
Machinists Union members have voted to reject a 3 year pay deal from ULA, so strike action and picketing outside KSC, Vandenberg and the factory in Decatur, Alabama may be on its way soon.
Hmm - ULA trying to cut costs to compete with SpaceX by cutting staff costs ?Kccv23highliftcam said:
MartG said:
Beati Dogu said:
Machinists Union members have voted to reject a 3 year pay deal from ULA, so strike action and picketing outside KSC, Vandenberg and the factory in Decatur, Alabama may be on its way soon.
Hmm - ULA trying to cut costs to compete with SpaceX by cutting staff costs ?"SLS requires Advanced Boosters by flight nine due to lack of Shuttle heritage components"
I like the sheer optimism of "SLS Flight 9"
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/05/sls-advanc...
I like the sheer optimism of "SLS Flight 9"
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/05/sls-advanc...
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff