![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I tend to agree but, not to the point of entirely excluding a format
of flinging stuff into space, such as blasting nuclear fuel pellets into orbit could become the lesser of evils, and not 1% the alternative cost. Actually, by far the cheapest and safest way into space, as well as for being the utmost environmentally friendly by creating the least CO2, is via compact robotic missions like TRACE or perhaps TRACE-II, and of those going to/from the sorts of places that actually matter to the greater humanity of Earth. I've posted on the subject of doing far more robotics, such as affording 100 of those per the cost of a single manned mission (that's including anything using the shuttle for launch and/or servicing). However, if you folks must insist upon doing things the hard and expensive way, not to mention most risky, via manned missions, then I do believe there's a reasonable back-door way out of this fiasco or perhaps toilet. It's a little somewhat spendy, but not nearly as God offal spendy as any future Earth Space Elevator (ESE) fiasco that's at best decades down the road of carnage at a truly horrific price tag. Although, a perfectly good means to many ends has been and is still obtainable and, it could be as all American as apple pie. I've gotten myself into this other ongoing means to an end, as for assisting others like perhaps yourself intent upon getting folks to/from Venus, or at least Venus L2 (VL2), as well as for the likes of Mars and just about any planet that's within our travel speed/time continuum. As for one testy thing, no matters what, you'll always be in need of some rather serious mass quantities of radiation shielding and, for that topic I've got just the ticket; the LSE Moon Dirt Express. Hard to imagine but, there's been some learning going on, this being in spite of those wizards of pro-everything Apollo and of absolutely anti-everything other under the sun. This is almost getting downright ridiculous, as for doing a lunar space elevator seems to technically win hands down time after time. This following page/link is merely about our safely accommodating the LSE lobby, or elevator sub-lobby, that's if we wanted to take some limited advantage of what the lunar thermal signature has to offer. This is where I've learned from others that our moon is far from being a dead horse, in fact it's somewhat toasty hot in the center, such as 830°C, as well as (wizard Jay will not want to hear this) internally more radioactive than Earth. Is this good news or what? LSE Lobby: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lse-lobby.htm Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA / the discovery of other LIFE on Venus Besides way too many other topics, here's other ongoing LSE UPDATES: LSE-CM/ISS Flywheels: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-se-flywheels.htm PRO/CON of ESE/LSE: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-ese-lse.htm Basalt tether GPa update: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lse-gpa.htm What stinking insurance? http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-ese-invincible.htm Your basic lunar space elevator: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-01.htm This is for the ESE huggers cult: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-edwards-se.htm Another LSE delivery effort: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-elevator.htm |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
National Space Policy: NSDD-42 (issued on July 4th, 1982) | Stuf4 | Space Shuttle | 150 | July 28th 04 07:30 AM |
European high technology for the International Space Station | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | May 10th 04 02:40 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 2nd 04 12:01 AM |
Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) | Rand Simberg | Space Science Misc | 18 | February 14th 04 03:28 AM |
International Space Station Science - One of NASA's rising stars | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | December 27th 03 01:32 PM |