A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Technology
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 1st 05, 03:58 PM
Bounty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)

Okay shoot me down if you have to but I think that "Ahad" guy had a
neat idea and was on the right track with his "Celestial Titanic" ship:

http://uk.geocities.com/aa_spaceagen...arth-ring.html

Just look at all these squillions of $$$ benefits:

-Save billions of dollars in ferrying up parts from Earth to build the
large-scale outer framework

-Save thousands of man hours and hundreds of radiation-exposed
astronaut spacewalks for station assembly

-Asteroid surface offers strong commercial potential for mining
precious minerals

-Bulk of the project from in-situ excavation, transportation of
asteroid to high Earth orbit and some initial mining, performed
robotically. Human crews arrive near the end to "seal the entrance" and
establish colony

-Opportunity to experiment re-creating a "miniature Earth" with
gravity, biosphere and self-sustaining ecosystem within a natural,
rocky structure much like Earth's own crust

-Logistically more attractive for easier access from the ground than
either a base on the Moon or one established on Mars

-First "truly promising", permanent off-Earth colony potential within
decades!

-Potentially a full-function transportation vessel for sailing the
great interplanetary or even interstellar oceans of space...

Why oh why do I want to go all the way to that grey thing, when there's
more economical business to be done nearer home with the right rock
from outer space? This is a smart idea - was a smart idea... still
plain wishful thinking.

Bounty

  #2  
Old February 2nd 05, 03:49 PM
Hop David
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Bounty wrote:
Okay shoot me down if you have to but I think that "Ahad" guy had a
neat idea and was on the right track with his "Celestial Titanic" ship:

http://uk.geocities.com/aa_spaceagen...arth-ring.html


In situ exploitation of asteroid or comet resources have been proposed
by science fiction writers and bona fide scientists. For example David
Brin (who is an sf writer and has been a planetary scientist) was a
co-author of "Heart of the Comet".

Giving himself pretentious sounding names (AA Institute of Space Science
& Technology) and presenting stuff that's been around for awhile as his
own revolutionary ideas doesn't enhance Abdul's credibility.

He needs to look at some of the problems. Launch windows to and from any
specific asteroid occur much more seldom than Lunar launch windows
(although there are asteroids whose windows occur about as frequently as
Martian windows).

Capturing an asteroid to earth orbit is difficult. There's a substantial
amount of delta vee and even a small asteroid can be quite massive.
There are varying hazards depending on the capture scheme. And I would
guess that no matter how safe the plan, there will be political obstacles.

This scheme:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/0...steroid.eater/
proposes using an asteroid's own material as reaction mass.
This could make altering an asteroid's path more doable. But Madmen
aren't off-the-shelf technology SFAIK.

I like Abdul's enthusiasm. But I wish he'd calm down and make more
sober, substantial contributions.

--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

  #3  
Old February 2nd 05, 05:49 PM
Rodney Kelp
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Well if you had a moon base you could go and fetch an asteroid and bring it
to the moon and process it. Plus drilling and mining on the moon may
discover all kinds of useful minerals and possibly water.
We could do it if we only spent what is spent on cosmetics and cosmetic
surgery which is a total waist of money on vanity.

"Bounty" wrote in message
oups.com...
Okay shoot me down if you have to but I think that "Ahad" guy had a
neat idea and was on the right track with his "Celestial Titanic" ship:

http://uk.geocities.com/aa_spaceagen...arth-ring.html

Just look at all these squillions of $$$ benefits:

-Save billions of dollars in ferrying up parts from Earth to build the
large-scale outer framework

-Save thousands of man hours and hundreds of radiation-exposed
astronaut spacewalks for station assembly

-Asteroid surface offers strong commercial potential for mining
precious minerals

-Bulk of the project from in-situ excavation, transportation of
asteroid to high Earth orbit and some initial mining, performed
robotically. Human crews arrive near the end to "seal the entrance" and
establish colony

-Opportunity to experiment re-creating a "miniature Earth" with
gravity, biosphere and self-sustaining ecosystem within a natural,
rocky structure much like Earth's own crust

-Logistically more attractive for easier access from the ground than
either a base on the Moon or one established on Mars

-First "truly promising", permanent off-Earth colony potential within
decades!

-Potentially a full-function transportation vessel for sailing the
great interplanetary or even interstellar oceans of space...

Why oh why do I want to go all the way to that grey thing, when there's
more economical business to be done nearer home with the right rock
from outer space? This is a smart idea - was a smart idea... still
plain wishful thinking.

Bounty



  #4  
Old February 2nd 05, 06:11 PM
Joe Strout
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article .com,
"Bounty" wrote:

Why oh why do I want to go all the way to that grey thing, when there's
more economical business to be done nearer home with the right rock
from outer space? This is a smart idea - was a smart idea... still
plain wishful thinking.


Rocks closer to Earth than the Moon are extremely rare. And when we see
one, we call it a "near miss."

Now, in terms of delta-V, there are some which are relatively cheap to
reach, though those too are pretty rare, and close encounters are even
rarer. So you'd be looking at extremely long trip times, unless you
have a very big rocket with lots of fuel to waste.

The Moon is the natural place to start for offworld development because
it is easier to reach than any other place except Earth orbit, pretty
much no matter how you look at it.

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'
  #5  
Old February 4th 05, 05:01 AM
Joann Evans
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Rodney Kelp wrote:

Well if you had a moon base you could go and fetch an asteroid and bring it
to the moon and process it.


Why necessairily the Moon? You can't land it, any 'processing' will be
on the asteroid itself, so it might as well be a high Earth orbit.

And 'go and fetch an asteroid' is easy to say...

Plus drilling and mining on the moon may
discover all kinds of useful minerals and possibly water.
We could do it if we only spent what is spent on cosmetics and cosmetic
surgery which is a total waist of money on vanity.


And what's wrong with vanity?


--

You know what to remove, to reply....
  #6  
Old February 4th 05, 10:17 AM
Malcolm Street
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bounty wrote:

Why oh why do I want to go all the way to that grey thing, when there's
more economical business to be done nearer home with the right rock
from outer space? This is a smart idea - was a smart idea... still
plain wishful thinking.

All you need to do is get a dinosaur-killer-sized asteroid into orbit closer
than the moon without risking it hitting the earth. Funnily enough, I
think a lot of people mightn't like that idea.

Good luck being allowed to do it even without technical obstacles.

I think asteroids in the longer term have a major role to play in space
exploration and colonisation, but FFS keep 'em away from the earth! :-)

--
Malcolm Street
Canberra, Australia
The nation's capital
  #7  
Old February 4th 05, 07:54 PM
Mike Combs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Rodney Kelp" wrote in message
...
Well if you had a moon base you could go and fetch an asteroid and bring

it
to the moon and process it.


Are you processing the asteroid into products for use on the lunar surface?
Because if the products are intended for use anywhere else, better to
process the asteroidal material in orbit than on the lunar surface.

--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of the National Non-sequitur Society. We may not make
much sense, but we do like pizza.


  #8  
Old February 5th 05, 02:29 AM
Fred J. McCall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Joann Evans wrote:

:Rodney Kelp wrote:
:
: Well if you had a moon base you could go and fetch an asteroid and bring it
: to the moon and process it.
:
: Why necessairily the Moon? You can't land it, any 'processing' will be
n the asteroid itself, so it might as well be a high Earth orbit.

Except most of our industrial processes work better in the presence of
at least some gravity. It makes a lot of things a lot more
convenient.

I'd think you just chuck it into a crater from on high and then go
strip mine it out. No 'landing it' necessary. Little to no
atmosphere means you can use solar furnaces for smelting.

: And 'go and fetch an asteroid' is easy to say...

Yep.

: Plus drilling and mining on the moon may
: discover all kinds of useful minerals and possibly water.
: We could do it if we only spent what is spent on cosmetics and cosmetic
: surgery which is a total waist of money on vanity.
:
: And what's wrong with vanity?

Rodney talks like someone who has never seen his girlfriend without
makeup. :-)

--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
  #9  
Old February 5th 05, 04:43 AM
Joann Evans
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Fred J. McCall" wrote:

Joann Evans wrote:

:Rodney Kelp wrote:
:
: Well if you had a moon base you could go and fetch an asteroid and bring it
: to the moon and process it.
:
: Why necessairily the Moon? You can't land it, any 'processing' will be
n the asteroid itself, so it might as well be a high Earth orbit.

Except most of our industrial processes work better in the presence of
at least some gravity. It makes a lot of things a lot more
convenient.

I'd think you just chuck it into a crater from on high and then go
strip mine it out. No 'landing it' necessary. Little to no
atmosphere means you can use solar furnaces for smelting.



But could you make the impact as a velocity low enough to leave
something worth working on (as opposed to scattering much of the mass
over half the Moon, and ejected back into space, with the following
orbital debris issues), as well as no major damage to the area?

That's what I meant by 'can't land it.' You can certainly arrange an
impact, but...


--

You know what to remove, to reply....
  #10  
Old February 5th 05, 09:31 AM
Kent Paul Dolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Malcolm Street" wrote:

All you need to do is get a dinosaur-killer-sized
asteroid into orbit closer than the moon without
risking it hitting the earth.


No, and no. You don't have to start with something
10 km in diameter, 200 m in diameter is a huge good
start for just getting a lot of mass available that
isn't at the bottom of (quite so deep) a gravitational
well, and you don't have to get it physically closer
than the material on the moons surface, just
energetically closer, which any stable Lagrangian
point orbit would suffice to accomplish.

Now that Smart-1 has proved humankind capable of doing
space the slow and steady way, what _are_ the
implications for robotically shipping a "rock" from
the asteroid belt to L5, probably (I have no clue how
to do the math) simpler than diverting something in a
profoundly non-circular solar orbit, like an earth's
orbit transiting asteroid, if one is willing to be
patient.

And, what constitutes a big enough "rock" to be worth
the effort?

xanthian.


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Space Calendar - May 28, 2004 Ron History 0 May 28th 04 04:03 PM
Space Calendar - April 30, 2004 Ron History 0 April 30th 04 03:55 PM
Space Calendar - March 26, 2004 Ron Astronomy Misc 0 March 26th 04 05:05 PM
Space Calendar - February 27, 2004 Ron History 0 February 27th 04 04:40 PM
Space Calendar - June 27, 2003 Ron Baalke Misc 3 June 28th 03 05:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.