![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 23, 10:40*pm, Andrew Nowicki
wrote: http://milo.com/blog/vintage-space-travel/ I grew up on Clarke's EXPLORATION OF SPACE, Colliers' articles MAN WILL CONQUER SPACE SOON by VonBraun, and Disney's TV shows and movies that vividly portrayed our future in space! http://www.brooklynbooks.us/si/8oo60.html http://home.flash.net/~aajiv/bd/colliers.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBi69V8oNuw The 1950s would lead to landing on the moon in the 1960s, and thence to opening of the solar system in the 1970s where we would have limitless energy and materials to feed an ever growing economy and end war, poverty, hunger, privation and ignorance forever - fulfilling the promise of technology by the end of the second millennium. Arthur Clarke said in 1951: "The crossing of space ... may do much to turn men's minds outwards and away from their present tribal squabbles. In this sense, the rocket, far from being one of the destroyers of civilisation, may provide the safety-value that is needed to preserve it." Which echoed the writings of Jules Verne in 1865 "In spite of the opinions of certain narrow-minded people, who would shut up the human race upon this globe, as within some magic circle which it must never outstep, we shall one day travel to the moon, the planets, and the stars, with the same facility, rapidity, and certainty as we now make the voyage from Liverpool to New York." When will we do it? Now! http://www.scribd.com/doc/30943696/ETDHLRLV http://www.scribd.com/doc/31261680/Etdhlrlv-Addendum http://www.scribd.com/doc/35439593/S...-Satellite-GEO |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
William Mook wrote: When will we do it? Now!
We have to reduce the cost of Earth-to-orbit transportation at least by one order of magnitude before we can debate the practicability of space colonization. Some useful ideas are posted in my on-line book - Earth-to-Orbit Transportation Bibliography: http://www.islandone.org/LEOBiblio/ I believe that the first step on the path to space colonization is robotic fabrication of small, reusable, liquid propellant rocket modules. You can find more info about these modules in my old book. I am working on a new rapid fabrication system. If it works, it can reduce the cost of liquid propellant rocket engines. Popular Science Apr 1952 has an article about Moon colony: http://books.google.com/books?id=oiE...colony&f=false By the way, I have been working on diverse projects: science, technology, even linguistics. You can find my Ygyde auxlang (auxiliary language, much better than Esperanto) he http://www.ygyde.neostrada.pl/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
William Mook wrote:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30943696/ETDHLRLV http://www.scribd.com/doc/31261680/Etdhlrlv-Addendum You can use wings on the first, and maybe on the second stage rockets, to slow down descent, but parachutes are cheaper. The solid rocket boosters of the Space Shuttle use parachutes to slow down before splashdown. Technical posts belong in sci.space.tech. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 26, 6:16*pm, Andrew Nowicki
wrote: William Mook wrote: http://www.scribd.com/doc/30943696/ETDHLRLV http://www.scribd.com/doc/31261680/Etdhlrlv-Addendum You can use wings on the first, and maybe on the second stage rockets, to slow down descent, but parachutes are cheaper. The solid rocket boosters of the Space Shuttle use parachutes to slow down before splashdown. Technical posts belong in sci.space.tech. Stick with wings, and fly those spent units right back to where they started. With Mook's spare or surplus amount of thrust, apparently there's not an inert mass problem. Otherwise simply mass produce and toss everything away is almost as good or even a little better than the parachute and water recovery options. ~ BG |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 26, 6:16*pm, Andrew Nowicki
wrote: William Mook wrote: http://www.scribd.com/doc/30943696/ETDHLRLV http://www.scribd.com/doc/31261680/Etdhlrlv-Addendum You can use wings on the first, and maybe on the second stage rockets, to slow down descent, but parachutes are cheaper. The solid rocket boosters of the Space Shuttle use parachutes to slow down before splashdown. Technical posts belong in sci.space.tech. Yes, and being moderated means that Mook isn't so easily allowed, while certain jackasses are free as a bird to topic/author stalk and trash whomever they like. But you are right, that topics and replies like those of Mook should be published in such moderated groups that mean business rather than foolishness. ~ BG |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 27, 8:32*am, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article 0c09a87b-662e-4e90-a3b9-5154bc00eed9 @t20g2000yqa.googlegroups.com, says... Yes, and being moderated means that Mook isn't so easily allowed, while certain jackasses are free as a bird to topic/author stalk and trash whomever they like. *But you are right, that topics and replies like those of Mook should be published in such moderated groups that mean business rather than foolishness. Yea that's it, "the man" is keeping Mook down. *Too bad you can't see me rolling my eyes as I type this. What is keeping Mook down are his insane "designs" which first require that a miracle happen giving him tens of billions of dollars of funding just to get his crazy development program started. *That's never going to happen. Jeff -- 42 Your better and assuming less crazy solution is? ~ BG |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
My Thoughts On The Future of Manned Space Travel | Matt Casey | Policy | 27 | September 16th 09 08:26 PM |
Time travel into the future | Hannu Poropudas | Astronomy Misc | 3 | July 20th 07 02:58 PM |
No future for space travel | Chris | SETI | 7 | May 5th 05 07:09 PM |
Future space travel | Falcon06 | Policy | 2 | April 2nd 04 05:03 AM |
Does manned space travel have a future?: Debate in London 6th December | Martin Earnshaw | Policy | 0 | October 7th 03 09:20 PM |