|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
|
#122
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
Pat, yes, the image is kinda funny. Henry is right, though, in fifteen
years, no one expects robots to replace a skilled human in the applications discussed. People will still be needed for teleoperation, high level supervision and repair. SEEGRID's first generation, the General Purpose Transporters,GPTs or Guppies, don't talk and they have a rudimentary form of Asimov's Three Laws imbedded. Besides, by the time speech is available in a commercial autonomous robot, the robots may view Henry as a godfather.;-) |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
water finding (was nuclear space engine - would it work ??)
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, Henry Spencer wrote:
In article , Steve Hix wrote: Worse, on a short-term project that never did expect to be able to explore areas that had much likelihood of containing usable amounts of water; they didn't have enough delta-v to permit landing anywhere other than close to the lunar equator. The constraints on landing sites were actually a bit more complicated than that. A polar Apollo landing *would* have been possible, although it would have presented some difficulties. Harrison Schmitt's "do something ambitious with the last few Apollos" proposal included a polar landing. Would Apollo planners have taken the 1961 paper of Watson, Brown, and Murray seriously? As I recall, for a decade or more afterward, nobody followed up on their speculation, at least not in print. So it's not like there was a large group of scientists clamoring to investigate the question, and making sure it was among the priorities for Apollo missions. Even assuming that the polar-ice idea was of enough interest to pursue, would Apollo astronauts have been allowed to explore a permanently-shadowed crater? I doubt it. -- Bill Higgins | "The victors write the histories, Fermilab | and also the DNA sequences." | --Barry Gehm |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
water finding (was nuclear space engine - would it work ??)
Bill Higgins wrote: On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, Henry Spencer wrote: In article , Steve Hix wrote: Worse, on a short-term project that never did expect to be able to explore areas that had much likelihood of containing usable amounts of water; they didn't have enough delta-v to permit landing anywhere other than close to the lunar equator. The constraints on landing sites were actually a bit more complicated than that. A polar Apollo landing *would* have been possible, although it would have presented some difficulties. Harrison Schmitt's "do something ambitious with the last few Apollos" proposal included a polar landing. Would Apollo planners have taken the 1961 paper of Watson, Brown, and Murray seriously? As I recall, for a decade or more afterward, nobody followed up on their speculation, at least not in print. So it's not like there was a large group of scientists clamoring to investigate the question, and making sure it was among the priorities for Apollo missions. Even assuming that the polar-ice idea was of enough interest to pursue, would Apollo astronauts have been allowed to explore a permanently-shadowed crater? I doubt it. -- Bill Higgins | "The victors write the histories, Fermilab | and also the DNA sequences." | --Barry Gehm This where a junction of several technologies could perform. NASA is not going to send men into a permanently-shadowed crater but it might send a rover. A Rover with the capabilities of either of the two currently on Mars or the "Mini-Cooper" sized one being readied for a future shot a Mars. One of the "imagined" technologies from the 60s was the "Chuck wagon" concept where a fully equipped station would be landed at the target and checked out over a period of time. This might include a preliminary recce by the Rover or some form of drone. Once checked out and approved the Chuckwagon can be the accomodation for a short or long stay depending on the discovery of water in a form useable by the explorers. |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
water finding (was nuclear space engine - would it work ??)
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Jack Linthicum wrote:
Bill Higgins wrote: On Mon, 9 Oct 2006, Henry Spencer wrote: A polar Apollo landing *would* have been possible, although it would have presented some difficulties. Harrison Schmitt's "do something ambitious with the last few Apollos" proposal included a polar landing. Would Apollo planners have taken the 1961 paper of Watson, Brown, and Murray seriously? As I recall, for a decade or more afterward, nobody followed up on their speculation, at least not in print. So it's not like there was a large group of scientists clamoring to investigate the question, and making sure it was among the priorities for Apollo missions. Even assuming that the polar-ice idea was of enough interest to pursue, would Apollo astronauts have been allowed to explore a permanently-shadowed crater? I doubt it. This where a junction of several technologies could perform. NASA is not going to send men into a permanently-shadowed crater but it might send a rover. A Rover with the capabilities of either of the two currently on Mars or the "Mini-Cooper" sized one being readied for a future shot a Mars. Perhaps you didn't understand that I was asking about Apollo-era NASA, the last few landing missions circa 1969-1972. Robot, or teleoperated, rovers were not available to NASA (though the Soviets had two successful ones around that time). Three Apollo landing missions were equipped with the Lunar Roving Vehicle to carry astronauts on long "traverses." I just don't think NASA would have risked sending astronauts into a cold, dark place, not during the first six landings anyway. And not for the sake of science which had very little support. Interest in polar ice didn't really get started until James Arnold's thorough paper on the concept in 1979, which suggested that volatiles from comet impacts might accumulate in cold traps near the poles. One of the "imagined" technologies from the 60s was the "Chuck wagon" concept where a fully equipped station would be landed at the target and checked out over a period of time. This might include a preliminary recce by the Rover or some form of drone. Once checked out and approved the Chuckwagon can be the accomodation for a short or long stay depending on the discovery of water in a form useable by the explorers. I think you'd discover the water first, and only in a later mission make plans to use it. -- She was only a | Bill Higgins rocket scientist's daughter, | Fermilab but she left the boys | Internet: exhausted behind her. | |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
In article ,
Pat Flannery wrote: Steve Hix wrote: In article , Pat Flannery wrote: Steve Hix wrote: Actually, as long as you don't require high speed, leg-based machines would be able to go places that tracked and wheeled vehicles can't go at all, or only with great difficulty. I recall seeing a writeup of a new-ish leg-thing in development specifically to deal with terrain that isn't suited for wheel/track vehicles. It wouldn't replace wheels, certainly, but it could supplement them for some environments. The Army's been playing around with this idea since the 1960's, but the Humvee's don't have legs on them yet. Nor are they ever likely to have them. That's not at issue. Yes, it is. You want to cover rough terrain in a wheeled vehicle? Let me introduce you to the Mace missile Teracruzer of the late1950's-early 1960's: http://www.mace-b.com/38TMW/Missiles/MM-1.htm This SOB could go through swamps, up mountainsides, over slushy snow, deep mud, sheer ice, small boulders, or tree trunks. Haven't seen a picture of that in years. Still, there is terrain that it can't handle... Unless you intend to set down in some sort of Chesley Bonestell lunar terrain, this concept will do just fine in getting you around in around 95% of the alien ground you are going to run into. Frankly, I wasn't thinking off-earth at all. Nor, for that matter, of replacing wheeled vehicles; supplementing them, actually. |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
Steve Hix wrote:. Yes, it is. You want to cover rough terrain in a wheeled vehicle? Let me introduce you to the Mace missile Teracruzer of the late1950's-early 1960's: http://www.mace-b.com/38TMW/Missiles/MM-1.htm This SOB could go through swamps, up mountainsides, over slushy snow, deep mud, sheer ice, small boulders, or tree trunks. Haven't seen a picture of that in years. Still, there is terrain that it can't handle... I had this model of it: http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/model...renwalm561.jpg It was very cool, and had lots of movable parts. Patat |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 04:45:18 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: Still, there is terrain that it can't handle... I had this model of it: http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/model...renwalm561.jpg It was very cool, and had lots of movable parts. ....Is it me, or do those wheels look like the ones off the Landmaster? http://www.snowcrest.net/fox/landmaster/ OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
"Robert Kolker" wrote in message . .. For a self sustaining habitat to exist on another planet there must be free water (or water that can be made free) on -that- planet. No. It merely has to be economic to haul. For example, it will almost certainly be cheaper to haul water to Venus than to try to extract it locally. If the means to deflect asteroids or comets is developed, then the water problem is solved. |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
nuclear space engine - would it work ??
"Robert Kolker" wrote in message . .. .. Our current rocket systems are merely elaborations of the rockets developed by the Chinese in the Tang Dynasty. Burn and coast travel is slow, but that is all we can do at the moment. This has to change. We need ways of moving larger payloads faster. Nuclear pulse jet. 'Project Long Shot' is a name I have dragged from deep in my memory. -- William Black I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach Time for tea. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
National Space Policy: NSDD-42 (issued on July 4th, 1982) | Stuf4 | History | 158 | December 13th 14 10:50 PM |
Moonbase Power | [email protected] | Policy | 34 | April 6th 06 06:47 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 1 | March 2nd 05 05:35 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | August 5th 04 01:36 AM |
National Space Policy: NSDD-42 (issued on July 4th, 1982) | Stuf4 | Policy | 145 | July 28th 04 07:30 AM |