A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

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

...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 14th 06, 12:36 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation


Besides, I'm not talking about the foreseeable future.
I'm talking about the future. Ultimately, say a century
or two down the road, where will our energy come
from? Solar power is the obvious conclusion.


So the oil has run out - where do we get our energy?

Wind power, tidal power, geothermal power, Earth-based solar power, and
fission reactors (more of which are being built right now) are all far
more cost-effective than anything that has to be launched into space,
maintained in space, replaced in space when it wears out, etc. etc.
Waste vegetation can be turned into fuel fairly easily, too (which is a
kind of solar energy, really). The combination of all these
Earth-based approaches will keep the price of power down way below any
motivation to get power from space.

You're looking at this backward - starting with the assumption that we
will go into space, then trying to justify it

Ads
  #12  
Old May 14th 06, 01:59 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation


wrote in message
oups.com...

Besides, I'm not talking about the foreseeable future.
I'm talking about the future. Ultimately, say a century
or two down the road, where will our energy come
from? Solar power is the obvious conclusion.


So the oil has run out - where do we get our energy?

Wind power, tidal power, geothermal power, Earth-based solar power, and
fission reactors (more of which are being built right now) are all far
more cost-effective than anything that has to be launched into space,
maintained in space, replaced in space when it wears out, etc. etc.
Waste vegetation can be turned into fuel fairly easily, too (which is a
kind of solar energy, really). The combination of all these
Earth-based approaches will keep the price of power down way below any
motivation to get power from space.



You're forgetting about the rest of the world that doesn't live
in a western-like economy. China is growing at ten percent
a year. Indonesia, India and the Asian tigers are having explosive
growth. Now these countries have very little industrialization.

When the rest of the world becomes as industrialized and energy
hungry as we are, they will be pump this planet dry. And all the
while using very little pollution controls.



You're looking at this backward - starting with the assumption that we
will go into space, then trying to justify it



No, you have it backwards. All things being equal, the simplist
explanation or solution is generally the best one.

Small steps do not lead to great accomplishments.
As the insignificance of each step fails to inspire
the next one. And is swept away by the next issue
that comes along.

A /large goal/ inspires and initiates those countless small steps
in pursuit of the long term dream. As the large goal has
magnificent benefits and countless justifications.

One approach fails, the other succeeds.

An intelligent and inspiring goal is the first step to success.





s




  #13  
Old May 15th 06, 03:14 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation

Do keep in mind that the US Gov sponsored the Airmail program for
multiple reasons - of which 'jumpstarting the aviation industry' only
one, if not a side effect.


Hmm, didn't find much about this in a quick web search. I found a few
mentions of "Kelly Act", the text of the act, and the interesting ways
it was amended later, but not much about the motivations. I don't
think the Congressional Record is online from back then, for
example...
  #14  
Old May 15th 06, 12:17 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation



mike flugennock wrote:


You mean, like
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/zucocket.htm
http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/z/zucux33.jpg ?

Please, give me a huge break.



This reminds me of a National Lampoon article supposedly from the late
1930's that had the headline "Germany intends to start robotic aerial
mail service between Europe and Britain in coming years" and showed some
German military men standing in front of a V-1.
This is a fun webpage: http://home.ionet.net/~paroales/ROCKET.HTM
Having a Rocketgram dispatched by His Highness The Maharajah would be
very cool.

Pat
  #15  
Old May 15th 06, 03:03 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation

Pat Flannery wrote:


mike flugennock wrote:


You mean, like
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/zucocket.htm
http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/z/zucux33.jpg ?

Please, give me a huge break.



This reminds me of a National Lampoon article supposedly from the late
1930's that had the headline "Germany intends to start robotic aerial
mail service between Europe and Britain in coming years" and showed some
German military men standing in front of a V-1.
This is a fun webpage: http://home.ionet.net/~paroales/ROCKET.HTM
Having a Rocketgram dispatched by His Highness The Maharajah would be
very cool...


Yeah, it would; depends on how it actually arrives at your house,
though. (IN-COMIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNGGGGGGG!)

--

..

"Though I could not caution all, I yet may warn a few:
Don't lend your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools!"

--grateful dead.
__________________________________________________ _____________
Mike Flugennock, flugennock at sinkers dot org
"Mikey'zine": dubya dubya dubya dot sinkers dot org
  #17  
Old May 15th 06, 06:00 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation

"Hyperboreea" wrote in message
ups.com...
Solar power requires massive infrastructure. You would need a cost per
Kg about 2 orders of magnitude lower than the current.


Prolly right...

Also, IMHO, SPS will not be able to provide more than a small fraction
of energy needs.


What, are we going to run out of space in GEO? It all depends on what
assumptions we make about our space lift capability. If we build a lift
capability which can loft SPS at a rate to make a significant contribution
to global energy needs, then that's what will happen.

The fact that SPS can be tremendously enlarged without any obvious
environmental problems here on Earth is one of its selling points.

--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By all that you hold dear on this good Earth
I bid you stand, Men of the West!
Aragorn


  #18  
Old May 15th 06, 06:32 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation

On Sat, 13 May 2006 09:48:59 -0400, "jonathan"
wrote:

[snipped]
Science at Nasa

Beam it Down, Scotty!

"Solar power collected in space and beamed to Earth
could be an environmentally friendly solution to our
planet's growing energy problems."
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23mar_1.htm


Jonathan


Did they ever do any studies of what beaming all that power through
the atmosphere would do to things like the ozone layer and weather
patterns, or is it so small compared to what we get from the SUN that
it wouldn't make a difference.

Actually, I've wondered if we could do some weather and energy usage
control with shades or reflectors in space. Could you diminish the
power of a hurricane by cutting off much of the sunlight to it since
it seems like warmth that makes hurricanes grow. How about partially
shading places like Los Angeles on hot summer days to cut A/C energy
usage or reflecting light to add an extra hour of mild daylight in the
winter. Of course, we'd have to be extremely careful when messing with
the weather. Except for hurricanes, I'd limit it to very densely
populated areas like LA where a lot of power usage might be
eliminated. Unfortunately, being able to shade or light a large area
from space would have some military potential as well, so it's
probably against some treaty to possess such capability.

-- David

  #19  
Old May 15th 06, 07:25 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation

"David Ball" wrote in message
...

Did they ever do any studies of what beaming all that power through
the atmosphere would do to things like the ozone layer and weather
patterns, or is it so small compared to what we get from the SUN that
it wouldn't make a difference.


Partly the latter. No affect on ozone, and since the frequency chosen is
one not readily absorbed by water vapor (for that very reason) shouldn't be
any significant affect on weather. There may be an affect on the ionosphere
which might annoy some ham radio operators, possibly.


--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By all that you hold dear on this good Earth
I bid you stand, Men of the West!
Aragorn


  #20  
Old May 15th 06, 08:23 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ...Lesson for Nasa! US Airmail and Aviation

On Sat, 13 May 2006 09:48:59 -0400, jonathan wrote:



"What began as a desire and need to carry mail by air
became today's global system of passenger airlines."
http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...rmail/POL6.htm



There can be little doubt that the efforts of the US govt
to jump start commercial aviation has changed the
world substantially and for the better.

The military started off by providing the initial technology,
rikkety Jennys, and some daring pilots. But the govt provided
something else far more substantial to creating the
world-changing industry of commercial aviation.

A market! A cargo! The US Airmail.

So....what is the market/cargo for space?


Water.

Lunar Lander.

Space Station Parts.

Space Station Supplies.

Mars Lander.

Space Station Astronauts.

Food.

Fuel.

Lunar Explorers.

The government currently has a budget for these items. Why not these thing
to start with?


--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @
 




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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.