A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

A magic Space Station that flies too...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 15th 04, 01:54 PM
AA Institute
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A magic Space Station that flies too...

Imagine if this could be done in the next 30 years, we'd have not only
established a foothold at a single location like the Moon or Mars...
but the whole solar system could become within reach!

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

And the stars too...

Kill all birds with just one stone... or one asteroid for that matter!
Other than simply the long timescales necessary for such a project, I
don't see any reason why we can't or should not do this...

Abdul Ahad
  #2  
Old October 20th 04, 05:57 PM
Micky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That is the most interesting idea ive ever read... I wonder what the cost of
doing that would be though... To much.
Do you think it would avoid radiation problems.??? because of the thick
surface area etc.


"AA Institute" wrote in message
om...
Imagine if this could be done in the next 30 years, we'd have not only
established a foothold at a single location like the Moon or Mars...
but the whole solar system could become within reach!

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

And the stars too...

Kill all birds with just one stone... or one asteroid for that matter!
Other than simply the long timescales necessary for such a project, I
don't see any reason why we can't or should not do this...

Abdul Ahad



  #3  
Old October 20th 04, 06:19 PM
Mike Combs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Micky" wrote in message
...

Do you think it would avoid radiation problems.??? because of the thick
surface area etc.


One doesn't really need anything beyond 2 meters of shielding, even for
life-time exposures.

--


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


  #4  
Old October 20th 04, 08:57 PM
Micky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I disagree. If you are going to be travelling on a one way trip. And totally
independant posibly not returning to earth in hundreds of years I think you
do.....

"Mike Combs" wrote in message
...
"Micky" wrote in message
...

Do you think it would avoid radiation problems.??? because of the thick
surface area etc.


One doesn't really need anything beyond 2 meters of shielding, even for
life-time exposures.

--


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




  #5  
Old October 20th 04, 09:21 PM
Joe Strout
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Micky" top-posted:

I disagree. If you are going to be travelling on a one way trip. And totally
independant posibly not returning to earth in hundreds of years I think you
do [need more than 2 meters of shielding].....


Mike's statement is based on widely-known published research. What is
your disagreement based on?

- Joe

P.S. Because it messes up the normal order of discourse, that's why.
Why is top-posting such a silly thing to do?

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'
  #6  
Old October 20th 04, 11:57 PM
Micky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My statement is based on common sense. I believe if ever the human race is
going to get anywhere and colonisation occur around our solar system in a
serious way "long term" then we need something that is near indestructible
with the help of technology .
It would need to sustain several 100 or up to 1000 people or more. With
nuclear power being used as the source of power I think this is even more
important. Why make the comet 3-4 metres thick and risk that many people.

Look at the problems the space station has.... Personally I think until we
do something like this even in 100's of years we wont ever leave our solar
system. We will certainly not go to Mars because of the problem that is
always going to exist of limited supplies. This solution seems to cure all
flight problems. As a world this would work after colonisation of the moon.
Getting materials up there is such a pain in the ass this would cure all
that.. This is the best idea ive ever heard that could actually work......
Missions like the rovers etc are interesting but pointless really because
they don't spread the human race which I believe we are all working towards.
Have NASA ever analysed the ideas possibility.?



"Joe Strout" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Micky" top-posted:

I disagree. If you are going to be travelling on a one way trip. And

totally
independant posibly not returning to earth in hundreds of years I think

you
do [need more than 2 meters of shielding].....


Mike's statement is based on widely-known published research. What is
your disagreement based on?

- Joe

P.S. Because it messes up the normal order of discourse, that's why.
Why is top-posting such a silly thing to do?

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'



  #7  
Old October 21st 04, 06:43 AM
AA Institute
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Micky" wrote in message ...
That is the most interesting idea ive ever read... I wonder what the cost of
doing that would be though... To much.
Do you think it would avoid radiation problems.??? because of the thick
surface area etc.

An asteroid exterior, by its very nature, is designed with
*protection* of human and life support cargos in mind. It's rock/metal
composition offers the ultimate in strength and *durability* against
not just radiation but all the cosmic elements likely to be
encountered on voyages spanning thousands of years.

I do not see cost as the bottleneck to this or any other project, I
see the prohibition on launching *nuclear* reactors and warheads into
space as the ultimate constraining force to all human progression in
the present era.

Technically, a state of *WAR* exists between the inhabitants of planet
Earth fighting to expand out into the cosmos and the surrounding
cosmic adversities levelled at humanity to keep it cocooned in on one
planet where it was born! (Now you're gonna say I sound like a
philosopher!!!)

In such a state of *WAR*, we should not have to wait 13 months to
orbit a probe around the Moon (e.g. Europe's SMART-1 arriving at lunar
orbit next month) or waiting several years to reach one small asteroid
using some puny ion-propulsion gismo! No, this is no time to be
relying on solar-electric propulsion. That to me is like fighting
someone with match sticks... who's using guns against you! What we
need are some heavy duty NUCLEAR blasters that get us to nearby solar
system bodies in weeks!

Get countries like Iran, North Korea and any other "axis of evils" who
stand in the way of human progression under manners, and we can safely
lift the ban on nuclear launches to outer space. Then we're in a
position to start carving out bases on the Moon, blasting asteroids to
Earth to build STARSHIPS, blasting astronauts to Mars and beyond...in
no time at all.

Abdul Ahad
  #8  
Old October 21st 04, 12:18 PM
Alex Terrell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(AA Institute) wrote in message . com...
Imagine if this could be done in the next 30 years, we'd have not only
established a foothold at a single location like the Moon or Mars...
but the whole solar system could become within reach!

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

And the stars too...

Kill all birds with just one stone... or one asteroid for that matter!
Other than simply the long timescales necessary for such a project, I
don't see any reason why we can't or should not do this...

Abdul Ahad


This is a bit ambitious for a first mission.

You mention a delta V change of 1.9 + km/s, for an object of about 64
billion tons. This is even before bringing it down to 40,000km
altitude.

assume you use electric propulsion, with an exhaust velocity of
20km/s, you still need about 6.4 billion tons of fuel.

As you say, this is "non-trivial".

Your best bet is to find a 3,000 ton Near Earth Rock (~15m diameter),
and bring this in a High Earth Orbit (400,000km). This could be done
with a probe weighing 50 tons (= LEO launch mass of about 150 tons),
using the rock material as a propellant.

Then process the asteroid, in High Earth Orbit, to create larger
missions. Eventually, you'll get up to billion ton rocks.

Critical to this is the ability to turn NEOs into solar power
generators.
  #9  
Old October 21st 04, 06:28 PM
Mike Combs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Micky" wrote in message
...
I disagree. If you are going to be travelling on a one way trip. And

totally
independant posibly not returning to earth in hundreds of years I think

you
do.....

"Mike Combs" wrote

One doesn't really need anything beyond 2 meters of shielding, even for
life-time exposures.


You are basing your opinion, as far as I can tell, on what you "think". I'm
basing my opinion on peer-reviewed NASA studies:
http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/SpaceSe.../5appendE.html

--


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


  #10  
Old October 21st 04, 06:33 PM
Mike Combs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Micky" wrote in message
...
My statement is based on common sense.


"Common sense" is a set of rules-of-thumb we've developed based on our daily
experiences. What personal experience have you had with shielding humans
from radiation in space long-term?

If you still don't see my point, I've had no experience in this area either.
That's why I depend on NASA studies rather than on my own intuition.

--


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


 




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
Gravity as Falling Space Henry Haapalainen Science 1 September 4th 04 04:08 PM
Moon key to space future? James White Policy 90 January 6th 04 05:29 PM
Special Recipes Give Space Station Crew A Tast of Home Ron Baalke Space Station 0 November 25th 03 02:02 AM
Report on China's Space Program Steve Dufour Misc 20 October 25th 03 06:43 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:29 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.