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 » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 16th 20, 07:57 AM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon


NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project which in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the Apollo 11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it

Ads
  #2  
Old May 16th 20, 10:35 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

Il giorno sabato 16 maggio 2020 08:57:35 UTC+2, ha scritto:

www.asps.it


Il giorno sabato 16 maggio 2020 20:45:02 UTC+2, Phantom_View ha scritto:
On Fri, 15 May 2020 23:58:16 -0700 (PDT), wrote:


NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project which in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the Apollo 11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it

Chemical rockets suck, that is the truth of it. Dreadfully
inefficient and prone to catastrophic failures.

For a "short" hop like the moon however, they could just
barely serve. This is especially true once hydrogen and
oxygen begin to get extracted from lunar soil.

So, booster recovery/reuse combined with getting a refill
at the ExxonLuna station could easily push the mass-
returned figure up to five percent or more. Depending on
WHAT you return, platinum and helium-3 for example,
we could be looking at a profitible enterprise.

Humans are more expensive to move, robots/androids will
be cheaper. So, assume a 100:1 robot/human ratio for a
profitible lunar colony.

But beyond the moon, forget it. Much more efficient "rocket"
tech will be required to break-even. Problem is, there ain't no
such thing and weird ideas about boosting stuff with gigawatt
lasers is just idiocy. We need a whole new view about "quantum
spacetime" before we will overcome these transportation issues.

There are simply no material resources, except perhaps high
quality diamonds, that will pay for trips to Mars or asteroids.
Going there to check things out is a worthwhile endeavor, but
after that ................ even 'bots cannot make it all worth it.


The missile system does not physically allow any permanent conquest in space ... as proof of the 50 years since Apollo 11, there is an ISS orbital station ... which is 1/1000 of the distance the moon is at!

The latest ISS comedy is that the supply rockets (automatically) failed 2 out of 3 launches!
The poor wretches in the orbital vomiter risked starving!
Think what will happen with the supplies for the moon that is 1000 times further away even if ALL the rest is OK! :-)

Now, after 14 astronauts died with the space shuttle, they are preparing to kill new astronauts with the lunar project Artemis ... only that NASA has become smart and will have them killed by deluded ones like Musk and Bezos :-(
  #3  
Old May 17th 20, 09:52 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Sylvia Else[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

On 16-May-20 4:57 pm, wrote:

NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project which in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the Apollo 11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it


The space shuttle was a dangerously flawed design that put back US space
travel several decades.

As far as I can see, no one has died during a spaceflight due to the
failure of a liquid fueled rocket. This doesn't mean it can't happen of
course, but it does suggest that the risks are being managed.

Sylvia.
  #4  
Old May 17th 20, 09:58 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Doctor Who[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

On 5/17/20 10:52 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 16-May-20 4:57 pm, wrote:

NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project which
in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on the
Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the Apollo 11
mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it


The space shuttle was a dangerously flawed design that put back US space
travel several decades.

As far as I can see, no one has died during a spaceflight due to the
failure of a liquid fueled rocket. This doesn't mean it can't happen of
course, but it does suggest that the risks are being managed.

Sylvia.



are you kidding us?

14 astronauts have died.

  #5  
Old May 17th 20, 10:04 AM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

Il giorno sabato 16 maggio 2020 23:35:54 UTC+2, ha scritto:
Il giorno sabato 16 maggio 2020 08:57:35 UTC+2, ha scritto:

www.asps.it


Il giorno sabato 16 maggio 2020 20:45:02 UTC+2, Phantom_View ha scritto:
On Fri, 15 May 2020 23:58:16 -0700 (PDT), wrote:


NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project which in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the Apollo 11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it

Chemical rockets suck, that is the truth of it. Dreadfully
inefficient and prone to catastrophic failures.

For a "short" hop like the moon however, they could just
barely serve. This is especially true once hydrogen and
oxygen begin to get extracted from lunar soil.

So, booster recovery/reuse combined with getting a refill
at the ExxonLuna station could easily push the mass-
returned figure up to five percent or more. Depending on
WHAT you return, platinum and helium-3 for example,
we could be looking at a profitible enterprise.

Humans are more expensive to move, robots/androids will
be cheaper. So, assume a 100:1 robot/human ratio for a
profitible lunar colony.

But beyond the moon, forget it. Much more efficient "rocket"
tech will be required to break-even. Problem is, there ain't no
such thing and weird ideas about boosting stuff with gigawatt
lasers is just idiocy. We need a whole new view about "quantum
spacetime" before we will overcome these transportation issues.

There are simply no material resources, except perhaps high
quality diamonds, that will pay for trips to Mars or asteroids.
Going there to check things out is a worthwhile endeavor, but
after that ................ even 'bots cannot make it all worth it.


The missile system does not physically allow any permanent conquest in space ... as proof of the 50 years since Apollo 11, there is an ISS orbital station ... which is 1/1000 of the distance the moon is at!

The latest ISS comedy is that the supply rockets (automatically) failed 2 out of 3 launches!
The poor wretches in the orbital vomiter risked starving!
Think what will happen with the supplies for the moon that is 1000 times further away even if ALL the rest is OK! :-)

Now, after 14 astronauts died with the space shuttle, they are preparing to kill new astronauts with the lunar project Artemis ... only that NASA has become smart and will have them killed by deluded ones like Musk and Bezos :-(


Il giorno domenica 17 maggio 2020 03:40:02 UTC+2, Phantom_View ha scritto:
On Sat, 16 May 2020 14:33:01 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Il giorno sabato 16 maggio 2020 20:45:02 UTC+2, Phantom_View ha scritto:
On Fri, 15 May 2020 23:58:16 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:


NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project which in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the Apollo 11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it

Chemical rockets suck, that is the truth of it. Dreadfully
inefficient and prone to catastrophic failures.

For a "short" hop like the moon however, they could just
barely serve. This is especially true once hydrogen and
oxygen begin to get extracted from lunar soil.

So, booster recovery/reuse combined with getting a refill
at the ExxonLuna station could easily push the mass-
returned figure up to five percent or more. Depending on
WHAT you return, platinum and helium-3 for example,
we could be looking at a profitible enterprise.

Humans are more expensive to move, robots/androids will
be cheaper. So, assume a 100:1 robot/human ratio for a
profitible lunar colony.

But beyond the moon, forget it. Much more efficient "rocket"
tech will be required to break-even. Problem is, there ain't no
such thing and weird ideas about boosting stuff with gigawatt
lasers is just idiocy. We need a whole new view about "quantum
spacetime" before we will overcome these transportation issues.

There are simply no material resources, except perhaps high
quality diamonds, that will pay for trips to Mars or asteroids.
Going there to check things out is a worthwhile endeavor, but
after that ................ even 'bots cannot make it all worth it.


The missile system does not physically allow any permanent conquest in space ... as proof of the 50 years since Apollo 11, there is an ISS orbital station ... which is 1/1000 of the distance the moon is at!

The latest ISS comedy is that the supply rockets (automatically) failed 2 out of 3 launches!
The poor wretches in the orbital vomiter risked starving!
Think what will happen with the supplies for the moon that is 1000 times further away even if ALL the rest is OK! :-)

Now, after 14 astronauts died with the space shuttle, they are preparing to kill new astronauts with the lunar project Artemis ... only that NASA has become smart and will have them killed by deluded ones like Musk and Bezos :-(



Sell recruits on the "It's An Adventure" thing ... then danger
(and some casualties) are expected.

Anyway, we need vastly more efficient propulsion tech if we
really want to move off this rock in any significant way. It will
not involve Newton - probably some neat-o hyperspace
tricks instead, assuming that is even possible.

Ooooh ... ! What if there ARE NO neat-o tricks at all, ever ?
We and any aliens would be stuck in our own backyards
for all time. What happens when we discover there is no
way out and resources are dwindling ?


This year I will show you that with PNN, the alternative solution to the trombetta astronautics exists.
  #6  
Old May 17th 20, 11:38 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Sylvia Else[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

On 17-May-20 6:58 pm, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/17/20 10:52 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 16-May-20 4:57 pm, wrote:

NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project which
in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on the
Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the Apollo 11
mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it


The space shuttle was a dangerously flawed design that put back US
space travel several decades.

As far as I can see, no one has died during a spaceflight due to the
failure of a liquid fueled rocket. This doesn't mean it can't happen
of course, but it does suggest that the risks are being managed.

Sylvia.



are you kidding us?

14 astronauts have died.


It helps if you read all of the comment.

Sylvia.
  #7  
Old May 17th 20, 12:41 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Doctor Who[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

On 5/17/20 12:38 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 17-May-20 6:58 pm, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/17/20 10:52 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 16-May-20 4:57 pm, wrote:

NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project which
in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on
the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the Apollo
11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it


The space shuttle was a dangerously flawed design that put back US
space travel several decades.

As far as I can see, no one has died during a spaceflight due to the
failure of a liquid fueled rocket. This doesn't mean it can't happen
of course, but it does suggest that the risks are being managed.

Sylvia.



are you kidding us?

14 astronauts have died.


It helps if you read all of the comment.

Sylvia.



it helps if you stop kidding us.

it helps if you stop contemptuous behavior against pnn.

  #8  
Old May 17th 20, 01:09 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Sylvia Else[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

On 17-May-20 9:41 pm, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/17/20 12:38 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 17-May-20 6:58 pm, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/17/20 10:52 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 16-May-20 4:57 pm, wrote:

NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project
which in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on
the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the
Apollo 11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it


The space shuttle was a dangerously flawed design that put back US
space travel several decades.

As far as I can see, no one has died during a spaceflight due to the
failure of a liquid fueled rocket. This doesn't mean it can't happen
of course, but it does suggest that the risks are being managed.

Sylvia.


are you kidding us?

14 astronauts have died.


It helps if you read all of the comment.

Sylvia.



it helps if you stop kidding us.

it helps if you stop contemptuous behavior against pnn.


How can I be contemptuous of something that doesn't exist?

Sylvia.
  #9  
Old May 17th 20, 01:21 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Doctor Who[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

On 5/17/20 2:09 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 17-May-20 9:41 pm, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/17/20 12:38 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 17-May-20 6:58 pm, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/17/20 10:52 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 16-May-20 4:57 pm, wrote:

NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project
which in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on
the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the
Apollo 11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it


The space shuttle was a dangerously flawed design that put back US
space travel several decades.

As far as I can see, no one has died during a spaceflight due to
the failure of a liquid fueled rocket. This doesn't mean it can't
happen of course, but it does suggest that the risks are being
managed.

Sylvia.


are you kidding us?

14 astronauts have died.


It helps if you read all of the comment.

Sylvia.



it helps if you stop kidding us.

it helps if you stop contemptuous behavior against pnn.


How can I be contemptuous of something that doesn't exist?

Sylvia.



see? it is your fault if we insult you.

  #10  
Old May 17th 20, 05:30 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

Il giorno domenica 17 maggio 2020 14:21:06 UTC+2, Doctor Who ha scritto:
On 5/17/20 2:09 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 17-May-20 9:41 pm, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/17/20 12:38 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 17-May-20 6:58 pm, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/17/20 10:52 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 16-May-20 4:57 pm, wrote:

NASA/MUSK should stop before starting with the Artemis project
which in my opinion is more dangerous than the space shuttle project.

Since 50 years rocketry is not able to perform manned outposts on
the Moon and Mars for the simple fact that not even 1% of the
Apollo 11 mass returned to earth.

www.asps.it


The space shuttle was a dangerously flawed design that put back US
space travel several decades.

As far as I can see, no one has died during a spaceflight due to
the failure of a liquid fueled rocket. This doesn't mean it can't
happen of course, but it does suggest that the risks are being
managed.

Sylvia.


are you kidding us?

14 astronauts have died.


It helps if you read all of the comment.

Sylvia.


it helps if you stop kidding us.

it helps if you stop contemptuous behavior against pnn.


How can I be contemptuous of something that doesn't exist?

Sylvia.



see? it is your fault if we insult you.


Mr. Who do not get angry and oppose the majority who believe that we will have permanent human outposts on the Moon and Mars with these comic suppositories for giants http://www.asps.it/suppostespaziali.jpg :-)
 




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
NASA considers orbital outpost near moon as next big project [email protected] Policy 18 October 1st 12 12:37 AM
NASA considers outpost beyond moon's far side [email protected] Policy 12 February 18th 12 06:41 AM
NASA plans to put astronauts back on moon by 2018, using old Ap... Michael Baldwin Bruce Astronomy Misc 5 September 21st 05 12:29 PM
Outpost, a longtime NASA tavern, damaged by fire Jorge R. Frank History 21 February 9th 05 12:31 PM
NEWS: The allure of an outpost on the Moon Kent Betts Space Shuttle 2 January 15th 04 12:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.