Barack Obama Publishes His Space Policy

Senator Barack Obama has published a comprehensive space policy that
is conspicuous in what it does not mention as in what it does.
Unfortunately it constitutes a return to the 1990s during which
astronauts flew in circles in low Earth orbit and commercial space was
ignored.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...ce_policy.html

Mark R. Whittington wrote:
Senator Barack Obama has published a comprehensive space policy that
is conspicuous in what it does not mention as in what it does.
Unfortunately it constitutes a return to the 1990s during which
astronauts flew in circles in low Earth orbit and commercial space was
ignored.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...ce_policy.html

In that URL we find:

quote
Obama is in favor of "a bold array of robotic missions that will expand
our knowledge of the solar system and lay the foundations for further
manned exploration." The reader will note the verbiage concerning
"further manned exploration." "Lay the foundation for." Not "do" or
"accomplish" or even "pursue." For a man who aspires to be the African
American John F. Kennedy, support for manned space exploration seems
tepid at best, nonexistent at worse.
end quote

Actually, this is avery good idea. Humans have no place in deep space
as I have demonstrated in this forum several times. The problem of
radiation shielding, tolerance for zero G, and (above all)
the development of space hardware for life support that offers
100 reliability for long periods of time (3-4 years).

Until all that exists, there will be no hope of humans in space
beyond what the ISS offers.


--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

jacob navia wrote:
Mark R. Whittington wrote:
Senator Barack Obama has published a comprehensive space policy that
is conspicuous in what it does not mention as in what it does.
Unfortunately it constitutes a return to the 1990s during which
astronauts flew in circles in low Earth orbit and commercial space was
ignored.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...ce_policy.html


In that URL we find:

quote
Obama is in favor of "a bold array of robotic missions that will expand
our knowledge of the solar system and lay the foundations for further
manned exploration." The reader will note the verbiage concerning
"further manned exploration." "Lay the foundation for." Not "do" or
"accomplish" or even "pursue." For a man who aspires to be the African
American John F. Kennedy, support for manned space exploration seems
tepid at best, nonexistent at worse.
end quote

Actually, this is avery good idea. Humans have no place in deep space
as I have demonstrated in this forum several times. The problem of
radiation shielding, tolerance for zero G, and (above all)
the development of space hardware for life support that offers
100 reliability for long periods of time (3-4 years).

Until all that exists, there will be no hope of humans in space
beyond what the ISS offers.

Empty core and upper stage cryogenic tankage will make excellent
regolith containers, and they can be delivered and filled robotically.

What we need is an equatorial commercial space station of more modest
means, where solar power satellites and large space vehicles can be
assembled, and then delivered unmanned via solar powered ion thrusters.

Once this infrastructure is in place on Phobos or Deimos or Ceres or
some other suitable asteroid, humans can simply rendezvous with it, and
have instant power, safe refuge, regolith shielding and materials.

The general idea is that pursuing this technology commercially will
yield benefits to an increasingly overpopulated and energy hungry world.

On Jan 11, 8:27 am, kT wrote:
jacob navia wrote:
Mark R. Whittington wrote:
Senator Barack Obama has published a comprehensive space policy that
is conspicuous in what it does not mention as in what it does.
Unfortunately it constitutes a return to the 1990s during which
astronauts flew in circles in low Earth orbit and commercial space was
ignored.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...obama_publishe...

In that URL we find:

quote
Obama is in favor of "a bold array of robotic missions that will expand
our knowledge of the solar system and lay the foundations for further
manned exploration." The reader will note the verbiage concerning
"further manned exploration." "Lay the foundation for." Not "do" or
"accomplish" or even "pursue." For a man who aspires to be the African
American John F. Kennedy, support for manned space exploration seems
tepid at best, nonexistent at worse.
end quote

Actually, this is avery good idea. Humans have no place in deep space
as I have demonstrated in this forum several times. The problem of
radiation shielding, tolerance for zero G, and (above all)
the development of space hardware for life support that offers
100 reliability for long periods of time (3-4 years).

Until all that exists, there will be no hope of humans in space
beyond what the ISS offers.

Empty core and upper stage cryogenic tankage will make excellent
regolith containers, and they can be delivered and filled robotically.

What we need is an equatorial commercial space station of more modest
means, where solar power satellites and large space vehicles can be
assembled, and then delivered unmanned via solar powered ion thrusters.

Once this infrastructure is in place on Phobos or Deimos or Ceres or
some other suitable asteroid, humans can simply rendezvous with it, and
have instant power, safe refuge, regolith shielding and materials.

The general idea is that pursuing this technology commercially will
yield benefits to an increasingly overpopulated and energy hungry world.

I agree, and that's exactly what the LSE-CM/ISS (aka tethered Clarke
Station) provides, and a whole lot more.
- Brad Guth

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:10:27 +0100, jacob navia
wrote:

Humans have no place in deep space
as I have demonstrated in this forum several times. The problem of
radiation shielding, tolerance for zero G, and (above all)
the development of space hardware for life support that offers
100 reliability for long periods of time (3-4 years).


None of which are show stoppers. Once upon a time, we wondered if
astronauts could survive a round trip to the Moon. The could and did.
Deep space has its challenges. But they can be overcome.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Michael Gallagher wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:10:27 +0100, jacob navia
wrote:

Humans have no place in deep space
as I have demonstrated in this forum several times. The problem of
radiation shielding, tolerance for zero G, and (above all)
the development of space hardware for life support that offers
100 reliability for long periods of time (3-4 years).


None of which are show stoppers. Once upon a time, we wondered if
astronauts could survive a round trip to the Moon. The could and did.
Deep space has its challenges. But they can be overcome.

At enormous costs, with no apparent benefits, which could be achieved at
many orders of magnitude *less costs*, without putting lives in danger,
by simply adopting rationality over fear and nutty religious beliefs.

Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:10:27 +0100, jacob navia
wrote:

Humans have no place in deep space
as I have demonstrated in this forum several times. The problem of
radiation shielding, tolerance for zero G, and (above all)
the development of space hardware for life support that offers
100 reliability for long periods of time (3-4 years).


None of which are show stoppers. Once upon a time, we wondered if
astronauts could survive a round trip to the Moon. The could and did.
Deep space has its challenges. But they can be overcome.



I didn't say they can't be overcome. Until they ARE overcome however,
humans can't go into deep space unless they want to commit suicide.

Of course deep space is not the moon, a mere 300 000 Km away and a few
days from earth. I am speaking about Mars, for instance, where the
round trip is several YEARS, i.e. 2-3 orders of magnitude longer than
a trip to the moon.

But even if it is possible to send humans to the moon, progress in
robotics and computers make such a trip unnecessary since we can
travel around in the moon using robots much cheaper than going
in person.

Humans can't survive in the moon for longer periods (3-4 weeks or
more) if they have no radiation shielding. BEFORE humans go to
the moon they need to build the moon station using robots, THEN,
longer trips to the moon are possible.

Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
very easy driving a robot there. Mars is between 600-1200
light seconds away, making a round trip of 1200-2400 seconds
what makes driving a robot possible but more difficult.

My point is: robotic missions allows us to explore NOW, and
develop the technology to enable the trips to space by humans
LATER.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

jacob navia wrote:
:
:But even if it is possible to send humans to the moon, progress in
:robotics and computers make such a trip unnecessary since we can
:travel around in the moon using robots much cheaper than going
:in person.
:

And if you want to send toasters to space rather than people, that's
the perfect position.

Now remove your agenda and try again.

:
:Humans can't survive in the moon for longer periods (3-4 weeks or
:more) if they have no radiation shielding. BEFORE humans go to
:the moon they need to build the moon station using robots, THEN,
:longer trips to the moon are possible.
:

Silly. Even if your 3-4 week claim is right, there's a whole
Moon-load of rock and such there. Ever heard of 'craters' and
'caves'?

:
:Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
:very easy driving a robot there.
:

Not so much, no. Try walking across the room and examining objects
doing a 'step-look' sequence of a second for each one. See how long
just exploring the room takes.

:
:My point is: robotic missions allows us to explore NOW, and
:develop the technology to enable the trips to space by humans
:LATER.
:

But what are we exploring for if people aren't going? Exploring can
wait in that case and we can kill planetary science for the
foreseeable future.


--
"It's always different. It's always complex. But at some point,
somebody has to draw the line. And that somebody is always me....
I am the law."
-- Buffy, The Vampire Slayer

Fred J. McCall wrote:
jacob navia wrote:
:
:But even if it is possible to send humans to the moon, progress in
:robotics and computers make such a trip unnecessary since we can
:travel around in the moon using robots much cheaper than going
:in person.
:

And if you want to send toasters to space rather than people, that's
the perfect position.

Now remove your agenda and try again.

:
:Humans can't survive in the moon for longer periods (3-4 weeks or
:more) if they have no radiation shielding. BEFORE humans go to
:the moon they need to build the moon station using robots, THEN,
:longer trips to the moon are possible.
:

Silly. Even if your 3-4 week claim is right, there's a whole
Moon-load of rock and such there. Ever heard of 'craters' and
'caves'?



Obviously you just go into a moon cave and make a good fire,
you hunt around for food, and live from the land...

Look man, can you think a bit seriously?

Even if you find a good cave (you have to FIND it first using
robots), you have to construct a whole environment for humans
in that place:

o air-tight so that humans can breathe.
o with enough water and food so that humans can live for a
while
o With enough "amenities" so that they do not go crazy:
showers, waste disposal, communications, fuel, solar
panels, and a big ETC!

All that must be there BEFORE the humans arrive. Or you
are seriously considering sending astronauts with shovels
to the moon? How they could survive when constructing
the moon base if there is no moon base yet?

It is obvious that sending construction workers to the
moon in temporary habitats carried at great expense from
earth is so silly nobody is seriously considering that.

NASA, by the way, is not even considering a moon base
at all.

:
:Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
:very easy driving a robot there.
:

Not so much, no. Try walking across the room and examining objects
doing a 'step-look' sequence of a second for each one. See how long
just exploring the room takes.


You get used to it in 1-2 hours practice.

:
:My point is: robotic missions allows us to explore NOW, and
:develop the technology to enable the trips to space by humans
:LATER.
:

But what are we exploring for if people aren't going? Exploring can
wait in that case and we can kill planetary science for the
foreseeable future.

You are not interested in knowledge or science. You just
want to send people there, and there is a lot of profit
to be made (not by you of course) in doing that, that is
why sending humans is proposed by certain people.

Personally, I do not give a dam about some guys jumping around
in the moon. I am interested in exploration and science.

I know, that is very old fashioned and not so "gee-whiz".
But, as said, I do not care about people getting disappointed.


--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

On Jan 13, 2:54*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
jacob navia wrote:

:
:But even if it is possible to send humans to the moon, progress in
:robotics and computers make such a trip unnecessary since we can
:travel around in the moon using robots much cheaper than going
:in person.
:

And if you want to send toasters to space rather than people, that's
the perfect position.

Toasters? Who said anything about toasters? Sensors, Fred. Cameras and
the like. And in the case of landers like the ones on Mars, they
actually sample the soil, the atmosphere, etc., as well as provide a
view of the surface.

The whole "toaster" notion is akin to claiming Abu Ghraib was "naked
twister". A poor excuse to minimize. But propaganda is
propaganda...poor Freddy, poor propagandist.


Now remove your agenda and try again.

You first.

:
:Humans can't survive in the moon for longer periods (3-4 weeks or
:more) if they have no radiation shielding. BEFORE humans go to
:the moon they need to build the moon station using robots, THEN,
:longer trips to the moon are possible.
:

Silly. *Even if your 3-4 week claim is right, there's a whole
Moon-load of rock and such there. *Ever heard of 'craters' and
'caves'?

Send some toasters up there to find out. LOL!


:
:Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
:very easy driving a robot there.
:

Not so much, no. *Try walking across the room and examining objects
doing a 'step-look' sequence of a second for each one. *See how long
just exploring the room takes.

They manage fine on Mars with a 3 to 20 minute delay, the moon at 1
second can only be an improvement.


:
:My point is: robotic missions allows us to explore NOW, and
:develop the technology to enable the trips to space by humans
:LATER.
:

But what are we exploring for if people aren't going?

What part about NOW vs. LATER didn't you get Freddy?

*Exploring can
wait in that case and we can kill planetary science for the
foreseeable future.

No, then we get nothing. Why not do both as we do now? Do you really
want to remove unmanned missions and keeped just the manned ones?

I'll make a deal with you I waon't advocate unmanned missions only if
you don't advocate manned missions only?

Eric