Daunting space mission: Send astronauts to asteroid

R

rdean

Guest
All this has to be ready to launch by 2025 by presidential order.

It has the dreamers of NASA both excited and anxious.

"This is a risky mission. It's a challenging mission," says NASA chief technology officer Bobby Braun. "It's the kind of mission that engineers will eat up."

This is a matter of sending "humans farther than ever before," says NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver. It is all a stepping stone to the dream of flying astronauts to Mars in the mid 2030s.

"I think it is THE mission NASA should embrace," says University of Tennessee aerospace professor John Muratore. "To be successful at this mission, you've got to embrace all of the technologies that you need for Mars."

The reason NASA Administrator Charles Bolden and others give is that this mission could save civilization.

If NASA goes to ion propulsion, the best bet would be to start the bulk of the ship on a trip to and around the moon without astronauts. That would take a while, but if no one is on it, it doesn't matter, Joosten says. Then when that ship is far from Earth, astronauts aboard Orion would dock and join the rest of the trip. By this time, the ship would have picked up sufficient speed and keep on accelerating.

Much of the habitat could be inflatable, launched in a lightweight form, and inflated in space. On Friday, July 22, 2011, NASA announced a competition among four universities to design potential exploration habitats.

Daunting space mission: Send astronauts to asteroid | R&D Mag

Brilliant plan by visionairies. Truly brilliant.
 
Whew!

That's ballsy

It's going to be next to impossible to moar up to one since they spin and tumble, so a manned mission would be overly dangerous.

But put some machines on it and they can use the asteroid as the engines to travel all over the place, sending information back for decades to come.

Possibly learning how to use them to launch us deeper into space.
 
Good thing we already have the Ares, Orion and Constellation, er,wait a second, Obama killed the boosters. How are we supposed to get there?

I can't wait until this jerkoffs one term is over.
 
from the article;

All this has to be ready to launch by 2025 by presidential order.



fucking righto chief!!:lol:




never happen.....:doubt:
 
Bruce Willis and Billy Bob Thorton already made it happen.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq6q2BrTino]‪Armageddon trailer‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]
 
I had to wait a couple hours to quit laughing hard enough to respond...

As a former KSC employee, this is about as exciting as a family vacation to Hoboken, NJ..

No purpose in the WORLD to send a manned mission to a space rock that we we don't want to use as base or revisit. "SAVE CIVILIZATION"???? :lol: Gimmeabreak -- that was movie, not a research plan..

Develop the ion engines.. Hell -- develop the warp engines.. Send advanced remote mobile laboratories.. But don't tell me that this isn't a dead end manned mission for the purpose of stemming the guilt for unemploying all those Shuttle employees.

Rather build a manned moon base in preparation for extended stays on Mars than go lassooing some errant space boulders.. THAT would be a focused strategy for manned missions..
 
I had to wait a couple hours to quit laughing hard enough to respond...

As a former KSC employee, this is about as exciting as a family vacation to Hoboken, NJ..

No purpose in the WORLD to send a manned mission to a space rock that we we don't want to use as base or revisit. "SAVE CIVILIZATION"???? :lol: Gimmeabreak -- that was movie, not a research plan..

Develop the ion engines.. Hell -- develop the warp engines.. Send advanced remote mobile laboratories.. But don't tell me that this isn't a dead end manned mission for the purpose of stemming the guilt for unemploying all those Shuttle employees.

Rather build a manned moon base in preparation for extended stays on Mars than go lassooing some errant space boulders.. THAT would be a focused strategy for manned missions..

Develop "warp" engines? Hilarious. Someones been watching too much "Star Trek".

Considering the moon is a mere quarter of a million millions away and Mars averages around 300 MILLION miles away, it's like building a gas station next door on your way to driving to California. It makes way more sense to build the gas station "halfway" to California, wouldn't you say?

And consider some of those asteroids. Some are almost pure iron 9 to 11 miles across. That makes it a tiny moon.

And think about this, why do scientists work so hard to find water on the moon? Or Mars? Give up? Water is made of oxygen and hydrogen. One means breath, the other is fuel.

Now one of the most interesting things about asteroids is many of them are made up of water. Just floating around. Oxygen and hydrogen. Hydrogen for energy, oxygen for life.

With the right asteroid, you could build a city way more easily than you could on Mars. Weightlessness takes way less energy. Raw material just floating around. Water right there for hydroponics for food and energy. Brilliant.
 
I had to wait a couple hours to quit laughing hard enough to respond...

As a former KSC employee, this is about as exciting as a family vacation to Hoboken, NJ..

No purpose in the WORLD to send a manned mission to a space rock that we we don't want to use as base or revisit. "SAVE CIVILIZATION"???? :lol: Gimmeabreak -- that was movie, not a research plan..

Develop the ion engines.. Hell -- develop the warp engines.. Send advanced remote mobile laboratories.. But don't tell me that this isn't a dead end manned mission for the purpose of stemming the guilt for unemploying all those Shuttle employees.

Rather build a manned moon base in preparation for extended stays on Mars than go lassooing some errant space boulders.. THAT would be a focused strategy for manned missions..

Develop "warp" engines? Hilarious. Someones been watching too much "Star Trek".

Considering the moon is a mere quarter of a million millions away and Mars averages around 300 MILLION miles away, it's like building a gas station next door on your way to driving to California. It makes way more sense to build the gas station "halfway" to California, wouldn't you say?

And consider some of those asteroids. Some are almost pure iron 9 to 11 miles across. That makes it a tiny moon.

And think about this, why do scientists work so hard to find water on the moon? Or Mars? Give up? Water is made of oxygen and hydrogen. One means breath, the other is fuel.

Now one of the most interesting things about asteroids is many of them are made up of water. Just floating around. Oxygen and hydrogen. Hydrogen for energy, oxygen for life.

With the right asteroid, you could build a city way more easily than you could on Mars. Weightlessness takes way less energy. Raw material just floating around. Water right there for hydroponics for food and energy. Brilliant.

You're a bigger moron than I thought you were.
 
The US pretty much retired from space when the Space Shuttle was grounded. Let the Russians do it.
 
I had to wait a couple hours to quit laughing hard enough to respond...

As a former KSC employee, this is about as exciting as a family vacation to Hoboken, NJ..

No purpose in the WORLD to send a manned mission to a space rock that we we don't want to use as base or revisit. "SAVE CIVILIZATION"???? :lol: Gimmeabreak -- that was movie, not a research plan..

Develop the ion engines.. Hell -- develop the warp engines.. Send advanced remote mobile laboratories.. But don't tell me that this isn't a dead end manned mission for the purpose of stemming the guilt for unemploying all those Shuttle employees.

Rather build a manned moon base in preparation for extended stays on Mars than go lassooing some errant space boulders.. THAT would be a focused strategy for manned missions..

Develop "warp" engines? Hilarious. Someones been watching too much "Star Trek".

Considering the moon is a mere quarter of a million millions away and Mars averages around 300 MILLION miles away, it's like building a gas station next door on your way to driving to California. It makes way more sense to build the gas station "halfway" to California, wouldn't you say?

And consider some of those asteroids. Some are almost pure iron 9 to 11 miles across. That makes it a tiny moon.

And think about this, why do scientists work so hard to find water on the moon? Or Mars? Give up? Water is made of oxygen and hydrogen. One means breath, the other is fuel.

Now one of the most interesting things about asteroids is many of them are made up of water. Just floating around. Oxygen and hydrogen. Hydrogen for energy, oxygen for life.

With the right asteroid, you could build a city way more easily than you could on Mars. Weightlessness takes way less energy. Raw material just floating around. Water right there for hydroponics for food and energy. Brilliant.

You're a bigger moron than I thought you were.

Who cares what you think, Mr. Cellophane?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKHzTtr_lNk&feature]‪Mr Cellophane‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]
 
The left thinks that the US can't afford to be the world's policemen but they think the US is responsible to take care of threats from outer space. Maybe the assumption comes from a century of Hollywood propaganda. Bill Clinton sold space technology to China. Let them take care of it.
 
I Considering the moon is a mere quarter of a million millions away and Mars averages around 300 MILLION miles away, it's like building a gas station next door on your way to driving to California.

(The retard doesn't get the immense fuel/weight advantage of an escape velocity of 2.4 km/sec instead of 11.2 km/sec. :rolleyes:)

What did you do in physics class - masturbate in the last row? :lol:
 
I Considering the moon is a mere quarter of a million millions away and Mars averages around 300 MILLION miles away, it's like building a gas station next door on your way to driving to California.

(The retard doesn't get the immense fuel/weight advantage of an escape velocity of 2.4 km/sec instead of 11.2 km/sec. :rolleyes:)

What did you do in physics class - masturbate in the last row? :lol:

Now that's hilarious. The amount of fuel your talking about is negligible when comparing a quarter of a million miles with 300 MILLION miles. Look at the size of the rockets it took to go to the moon. They were huge. Sure they coasted, but it took a lot of fuel to get up to the speed needed to coast and a lot of fuel to slow down. Then you have to come back the same way.

Why do you think they are talking "ion" drive and using the gravity of earth and the moon? They start the ion drive ship and use the earth's and moon's gravity to increase speed to the point where you can sling shot off into space. They can do it over and over again for a long period of time to build up speed and no one even has to be on board. Then you use a fast rocket to catch up and dock with it and load it with passengers and whatever else they need.

Right wingers think they should just go ahead and build a "warp" drive and get it "out of the way'. Now THAT is hilarious. No wonder they don't make good scientists.
 
I had to wait a couple hours to quit laughing hard enough to respond...

As a former KSC employee, this is about as exciting as a family vacation to Hoboken, NJ..

No purpose in the WORLD to send a manned mission to a space rock that we we don't want to use as base or revisit. "SAVE CIVILIZATION"???? :lol: Gimmeabreak -- that was movie, not a research plan..

Develop the ion engines.. Hell -- develop the warp engines.. Send advanced remote mobile laboratories.. But don't tell me that this isn't a dead end manned mission for the purpose of stemming the guilt for unemploying all those Shuttle employees.

Rather build a manned moon base in preparation for extended stays on Mars than go lassooing some errant space boulders.. THAT would be a focused strategy for manned missions..

Develop "warp" engines? Hilarious. Someones been watching too much "Star Trek".

Considering the moon is a mere quarter of a million millions away and Mars averages around 300 MILLION miles away, it's like building a gas station next door on your way to driving to California. It makes way more sense to build the gas station "halfway" to California, wouldn't you say?

And consider some of those asteroids. Some are almost pure iron 9 to 11 miles across. That makes it a tiny moon.

And think about this, why do scientists work so hard to find water on the moon? Or Mars? Give up? Water is made of oxygen and hydrogen. One means breath, the other is fuel.

Now one of the most interesting things about asteroids is many of them are made up of water. Just floating around. Oxygen and hydrogen. Hydrogen for energy, oxygen for life.

With the right asteroid, you could build a city way more easily than you could on Mars. Weightlessness takes way less energy. Raw material just floating around. Water right there for hydroponics for food and energy. Brilliant.

You're a bigger moron than I thought you were.

I'm sorry Frank. It just occurs to me that you may not know water is made from "hydrogen" and "oxygen". Just to make sure, you do know the earth is round? Right?
 

Forum List

Back
Top