In sci.space.policy AA Institute wrote:
Tim Auton wrote in message . ..
(AA Institute) wrote:

Before anybody gives me that look...

Too late

I wouldn't want to be on an orbital space station with some loon
blowing up asteroids around the same planet.

Fair comment, I wouldn't want to either!

So what do *you* think would make a nice, comfy orbital colony?

I don't think we presently know for sure.


I mean we've tried the Salyut, Skylab, Mir, ISS... and god knows
whatever else is coming next, with frankly very little in the way of
establishing a permanent presence in space. Granted, these were highly

Well, they did create a permanent presence in space to an extent.

*essential*, interim experience and confidence building steps. I doubt
very much I would have had the confidence to put forward starship
designs with biospheres and orbital engineering projects with asteroid
hollowing, had it not been for these early successful steps.

No. It doesn't really give much additional assurances.


So, do we need a scaled up version of another ISS style station in a
higher orbit around the Earth or would it be more beneficial to grab
an asteroid and try a fresh approach? If the asteroid is carefully
selected using prior robotic surveying, it may offer us a wealth of
mineral resources as a bonus. And part of its excavation toward
building a habitat would come from the mineral mining.

We need something desigend for teh resarch of the interesting problems,
something scaled up ISS wouldn't really be.


I hear a lot of noise about "mining the sky", and how asteroid mining
could become HOT property in the future. But how many of those
noise-makers have the vision to say let's grab an asteroid around the
Earth, where it would be infinitely easier to mine?

One first needs proof of it being economic.


The AA Institute is the *FIRST* science authority on this planet with
the exceptional foresight, courage and boldness to put forward such
confident and robust proposals!!!

Bull****.


AAI

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++