|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
One more reason why spaceflight without Orion technology is not viable
Orion is the only theoretically-feasible (within any kind of realistic time-frame) way to go on missions further than the moon.
http://www.theweathernetwork.com/new...ort_code=2xeyh |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
One more reason why spaceflight without Orion technology is not viable
On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 4:44:07 AM UTC-4, RichA wrote:
Orion is the only theoretically-feasible (within any kind of realistic time-frame) way to go on missions further than the moon. http://www.theweathernetwork.com/new...ort_code=2xeyh The use of nuclear bombs in space is generally frowned upon, although perhaps less so by China and Russia. During most of a three year journey to Mars and back the food will taste rather crummy. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
One more reason why spaceflight without Orion technology is not viable
On Tue, 5 May 2015 01:44:05 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote: Orion is the only theoretically-feasible (within any kind of realistic time-frame) way to go on missions further than the moon. It is, of course, a totally ludicrous, unsupportable, unsustainable, and unworkable solution. Let's not forget that. Thankfully, nobody is wasting money on exploring it anymore. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
One more reason why spaceflight without Orion technology is notviable
On 5/5/15 6:41 AM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2015 01:44:05 -0700 (PDT), RichA wrote: Orion is the only theoretically-feasible (within any kind of realistic time-frame) way to go on missions further than the moon. It is, of course, a totally ludicrous, unsupportable, unsustainable, and unworkable solution. Let's not forget that. Thankfully, nobody is wasting money on exploring it anymore. NERVA. You forgot NERVA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA Not just theoretical, but actually tested. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
One more reason why spaceflight without Orion technology is not viable
On Tue, 05 May 2015 08:15:08 -0700, lal_truckee
wrote: On 5/5/15 6:41 AM, Chris L Peterson wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2015 01:44:05 -0700 (PDT), RichA wrote: Orion is the only theoretically-feasible (within any kind of realistic time-frame) way to go on missions further than the moon. It is, of course, a totally ludicrous, unsupportable, unsustainable, and unworkable solution. Let's not forget that. Thankfully, nobody is wasting money on exploring it anymore. NERVA. You forgot NERVA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA Not just theoretical, but actually tested. Yeah, and a much more practical concept than Orion. But still quite archaic and probably not of much use for future missions. High thrust ion engines are probably the future of deep space missions (very likely utilizing nuclear energy of some sort for the actual energy source). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
One more reason why spaceflight without Orion technology is notviable
On 5/5/2015 10:15 AM, lal_truckee wrote:
On 5/5/15 6:41 AM, Chris L Peterson wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2015 01:44:05 -0700 (PDT), RichA wrote: Orion is the only theoretically-feasible (within any kind of realistic time-frame) way to go on missions further than the moon. It is, of course, a totally ludicrous, unsupportable, unsustainable, and unworkable solution. Let's not forget that. Thankfully, nobody is wasting money on exploring it anymore. NERVA. You forgot NERVA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA Not just theoretical, but actually tested. And also VASIMR http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/tra...ropulsion.html also tested |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
One more reason why spaceflight without Orion technology is not viable
On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 9:31:19 AM UTC-6, Chris L Peterson wrote:
Yeah, and a much more practical concept than Orion. But still quite archaic and probably not of much use for future missions. High thrust ion engines are probably the future of deep space missions (very likely utilizing nuclear energy of some sort for the actual energy source). Even high thrust ion engines (or the Shawyer drive, if we should be so lucky as for it to actually work) are kind of slow for manned missions, more so given the radiation issue recently highlighted. John Savard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scientists grow viable vaginas in lab ... | Hägar | Misc | 6 | April 14th 14 03:18 PM |
Why is push gravity concept considered not viable by mainstream science? | [email protected] | Misc | 2 | May 27th 06 05:10 AM |
A viable option to quantizing gravity? | kurtan | Research | 0 | January 24th 05 10:14 AM |
Lowest altitude viable Mars orbit | Explorer8939 | Technology | 14 | March 12th 04 02:58 PM |
Gravity control technology for spaceflight - is this for rea? | forspace2003 | Astronomy Misc | 1 | November 30th 03 06:30 AM |