Keep ISS Alive

Lee wrote:
"John Doe" wrote in message ...
Z 1 Y 0 N 3 X wrote:

(IMHO) The ISS is a huge waste of time. Yeah, it's the first of it's
kind and it was cool for a while, but if you think about it, what the
hell are we going to do with it? Super, we have a lab in zero-g. We
would be much better off going to Mars right now.

ISS is far more useful to go to mars than CEV. Consider all the
technologies and designs that have been developped for the ISS and
which can be used for the mars expedition ship (which would be
tantamount to an ISS with big engines, and a lander ship attached to it
as well as MPLMs for stowage of consumables. (as well as shielding for
the whole complex).


Snipped for brevity.

Ok, it's simple. Any attempt to put men/women on Mars is lunacy and
suicidal. Do the research, read the material do your own thinking. The cost
alone will run into the tens of billions of dollars--the numbers are mind
numbing. The chances of the crew actually reaching Mars are slim; returning
to earth is even worse. Hell, outerspace is a dangerous place. Humans to
Mars is a wrongheaded drunken pipe-dream a fantasy that can't happen, at
least not in this century. Explore the cosmos yes, but with robots and a
mature sane plan that is sustainable. Just my two cents.


So how much more does the Iraq war cost that going to Mars? See this
link for numbers if you need them:
http://nationalpriorities.org/index....per&Itemid=182

Spaceflight is chump change in comparison.

Eric

In article .com,
"Z 1 Y 0 N 3 X" wrote:

(IMHO) The ISS is a huge waste of time. Yeah, it's the first of it's
kind and it was cool for a while, but if you think about it, what the
hell are we going to do with it?

Use it as a test bed for space technologies? Use its resupply as a
driver of commercial launch services?

Super, we have a lab in zero-g. We
would be much better off going to Mars right now.

What for? It's much too far away for any serious development, and even
a flags & footprints mission would be ridiculously expensive (and
dangerous).

Screw the moon, the
only plus about colonizing on the moon is that it is close to us.

Right, and that's a HUGE plus. If God had wanted us to colonize space,
He would have given us a large moon. Oh wait, He did...

Mars has far more minerals

Like what, exactly?

an atmosphere (for what it's worth)

....which is very little, though I'll admit it does have its uses.

and water to some extent.

So does the Moon, to some extent. Though it's easier to get to on Mars
-- it's just that Mars itself is ridiculously harder to get to.

Waiting until 2010 is a waste of time, and billions of
dollars spent on the ISS every flight is a waste of money as well.

"Waiting" until 2010? It's almost 2007 now. What's waiting?

As for ISS, it's got many problems, but it IS there and it has its uses.

I dunno, I guess we might need to rely on private enterprises to get us
to where we really need to be going.

This is the first sensible thing I've read in your whole message.

I'm rooting for the Space Elevator.

I'll root for it too, but I'm not holding my breath either.

Best,
- Joe

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
oups.com...

Lee wrote:
"John Doe" wrote in message
...
Z 1 Y 0 N 3 X wrote:

(IMHO) The ISS is a huge waste of time. Yeah, it's the first of it's
kind and it was cool for a while, but if you think about it, what the
hell are we going to do with it? Super, we have a lab in zero-g. We
would be much better off going to Mars right now.

ISS is far more useful to go to mars than CEV. Consider all the
technologies and designs that have been developped for the ISS and
which can be used for the mars expedition ship (which would be
tantamount to an ISS with big engines, and a lander ship attached to it
as well as MPLMs for stowage of consumables. (as well as shielding for
the whole complex).


Snipped for brevity.

Ok, it's simple. Any attempt to put men/women on Mars is lunacy and
suicidal. Do the research, read the material do your own thinking. The
cost
alone will run into the tens of billions of dollars--the numbers are mind
numbing. The chances of the crew actually reaching Mars are slim;
returning
to earth is even worse. Hell, outerspace is a dangerous place. Humans to
Mars is a wrongheaded drunken pipe-dream a fantasy that can't happen, at
least not in this century. Explore the cosmos yes, but with robots and a
mature sane plan that is sustainable. Just my two cents.


So how much more does the Iraq war cost that going to Mars? See this
link for numbers if you need them:
http://nationalpriorities.org/index....per&Itemid=182

Spaceflight is chump change in comparison.

Eric


Good link, Thanks.

You all must have miss-read my message. I essentially said why keep
building it until 2010? We have a dockable space station as it is. Is
much more really going to happen to it in 3 years? I didn't say destroy
it.

I think some of you are still stuck on the fact it currently takes 6
months to get to Mars. By the time we would have made camp on the Moon,
we would have technology already to cut that time to a 6 week journey.
There are far too many bonuses about Mars than there are the Moon. I've
read so many articles about why we should be going to Mars instead of
the moon.

"The chances of the crew actually reaching Mars are slim; returning
to earth is even worse. Hell, outerspace is a dangerous place. Humans
to
Mars is a wrongheaded drunken pipe-dream a fantasy that can't happen,
at
least not in this century."

Good thing you aren't and won't ever be an astronaut then? And don't
get started on being a realist, thats pessimism.

And I remember someone earlier posting something about god actually
existing. Oh, and that he gave us a Moon. Thats pretty funny. God gave
us life and animals and water and fire too, didn't he? Screw evolution
and combustion, and those darned scientists proving daily that he
doesn't exist, he does...

Eric Chomko wrote:
So how much more does the Iraq war cost that going to Mars? See this
link for numbers if you need them:
http://nationalpriorities.org/index....per&Itemid=182

Spaceflight is chump change in comparison.

Eric
I forgot to quote this guy. Perfect example of expenses and where our
current financial priorities are right now. Like some of you said, it
will take tens of billions of dollars to get to Mars... whoa, thats
like... 3% of what we are currently spending on the WAR!!1!one The
polls from americans about being in the oil war speak for themselves.

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 16:20:43 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Lee"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as
to indicate that:

Ok, it's simple. Any attempt to put men/women on Mars is lunacy and
suicidal. Do the research, read the material do your own thinking. The cost
alone will run into the tens of billions of dollars--the numbers are mind
numbing. The chances of the crew actually reaching Mars are slim; returning
to earth is even worse. Hell, outerspace is a dangerous place. Humans to
Mars is a wrongheaded drunken pipe-dream a fantasy that can't happen, at
least not in this century. Explore the cosmos yes, but with robots and a
mature sane plan that is sustainable. Just my two cents.

A lot more than your thoughts are worth.

"Z 1 Y 0 N 3 X" wrote in message
oups.com...

Eric Chomko wrote:
So how much more does the Iraq war cost that going to Mars? See this
link for numbers if you need them:
http://nationalpriorities.org/index....per&Itemid=182

Spaceflight is chump change in comparison.

Eric
I forgot to quote this guy. Perfect example of expenses and where our
current financial priorities are right now. Like some of you said, it
will take tens of billions of dollars to get to Mars... whoa, thats
like... 3% of what we are currently spending on the WAR!!1!one The
polls from americans about being in the oil war speak for themselves.

Figures as high as 600 billion dollars to put humans on Mars isn't exactly
chump change [1]. Yeah, and the war in Iraq isn't cheap either. A few
billion dollars here a few billion there and pretty soon it adds up to a
bankrupt country.

I can see it now in big headlines the "US space industry is sold to China to
cover its debt". Yes, it's far fetched, and the US people wouldn't allow it,
but you get the point.

[1]
http://maroon.uchicago.edu/viewpoint..._600_billi.php

And by the way, have a nice day.

"Lee" wrote:

I can see it now in big headlines the "US space industry is sold to China to
cover its debt". Yes, it's far fetched, and the US people wouldn't allow it,
but you get the point.

Actually, I don't think there's a valid point to be got. The US space
industry isn't exactly owned by the government, so selling it wouldn't
exactly help cover the government's debt.

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 22:06:51 -0400, in a place far, far away, Alan
Anderson made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

"Lee" wrote:

I can see it now in big headlines the "US space industry is sold to China to
cover its debt". Yes, it's far fetched, and the US people wouldn't allow it,
but you get the point.

Actually, I don't think there's a valid point to be got. The US space
industry isn't exactly owned by the government, so selling it wouldn't
exactly help cover the government's debt.

Shhhhhhh...

Don't confuse him with reality...

"Alan Anderson" wrote in message
...
"Lee" wrote:

I can see it now in big headlines the "US space industry is sold to China
to
cover its debt". Yes, it's far fetched, and the US people wouldn't allow
it,
but you get the point.

Actually, I don't think there's a valid point to be got. The US space
industry isn't exactly owned by the government, so selling it wouldn't
exactly help cover the government's debt.

The point being a country has a limited amount of resources/wealth at its
disposal. If a country spends more than it takes in from its citizens in the
form of taxes it acquires debt. This debt must be paid. Now a country could
borrow money from its citizens or from another country or it could sell
resources oil, coal, land or any government item, whatever has value. In
anycase, too much debt limits a countries choices.

Here is the full text:

Figures as high as 600 billion dollars to put humans on Mars isn't exactly
chump change [1]. Yeah, and the war in Iraq isn't cheap either. A few
billion dollars here a few billion there and pretty soon it adds up to a
bankrupt country.

I can see it now in big headlines the "US space industry is sold to China to
cover its debt". Yes, it's far fetched, and the US people wouldn't allow it,
but you get the point.

[1]
http://maroon.uchicago.edu/viewpoint..._600_billi.php

And by the way, have a nice day.