Back to the Moon?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I believe that the incidental and accidental discoveries, technologies, materials, and science data along the way are way more important than the actual fact of having humans on the Moon/Mars.
We may get new oil types out of it!
 
As mechtech points out, the technology and knowledge would be its own payoff. Just as a suggestion, how about a geriatric-care facility? One-sixth Earth gravity would be good for weak hearts.

Believe me, if Luna City were a going concern, I'd have signed up to live and work there a long time ago. A climate-controlled environment sounds pretty good.

(Though, with my luck, they'd probably decide to save energy and set the climate control to 80 degrees in all the tunnels and shops. Gah.)
.
 
Is is kind of funny. Basically NASA is going back to more ordinary rockets although they will be using some Space Shuttle technology and the booster rockets will be recovered. But basically it is back to the expendable rocket again.

Russia copied the Space Shuttle, made one launch, and the Russians realized it was too expensive to use launch vehicles like the Space Shuttle. So the Russians quite logically went back to expendable launch vehicles (more conventional rockets). Basically, NASA is doing the same thing, but it took NASA many years longer to realize the truth.

I never did like the Space Shuttle. More conventional type rockets have always been a better, safer, and cheaper way into space. Now that NASA has finally seen the light we can go back to using cheaper and safer launch vehicles (too bad two 7 person flight crews had to die in the Space Shuttle) and the Space Shuttle can be put on display in museums, just like the Russian Space Shuttle is on display.
 
To the moon, Alice ..... to the moon.
rolleyes.gif


P.B.
 
We really don't have the money to go back to the moon. Its good PR but not gonna' happen. Unmanned exploration is the only way to go. The level of safety now required and the resulting costs of 100% guarantee make it impractical.

I really see no benefits to it in either case.

If we were truly interested in the advancement of science the Super Collider started but never finished would have put the U.S. ahead in Quantum Mechanics for decades. That's where the real fronteer is.

Sadely it fell by the wayside a victum to more important things like the Agriculture Security Bill (read "Pork").
 
Moon travel is more intriguing to 3rd graders wondering if they should pay attention in science and math classes.

Space exploration might be pork, but it's "smart pork", and helps keep bright engineering minds stateside. We should always have a new project every decade or two... and this isn't a mylar orbiting advertising billboard as had once been proposed.
rolleyes.gif
 
As the Romans were responsible for a major part of the Space Shuttle SRB sizing maybe it is time to move on?

Say friend, did you know that the US Standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches.

That's an exceedingly odd number. Why was that gauge used?

Because that's the way they built them in England, and the US railroads were built by English expatriates.

I see, but why did the English build them like that?

Because the first railway lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used.

Well, why did they use that gauge in England?

Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.

Okay! Why did their wagons use that odd wheel spacing?

Because, if they tried to use any other spacing the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads. Because that's the spacing of the old wheel ruts.

So who built these old rutted roads?

The first long distance roads in Europe were built by Imperial Rome for the benefit of their legions. The Roman roads have been used ever since.

And the ruts?

The original ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagons, were first made by the wheels of Roman war chariots. Since the chariots were made for or by Imperial Rome they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing.

Thus, we have the answer to the original question. The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches derives from the original specification for an Imperial Roman army war chariot.

And the motto of the story is Specifications and bureaucracies live forever.

So, the next time you are handed a specification and wonder what horse's *** came up with it, you may be exactly right. Because the Imperial Roman chariots were made to be just wide enough to accommodate the back-ends of two war-horses.

So, just what does this have to do with the exploration of space?

Well, there's an interesting extension of the story about railroad gauge and horses' behinds. When we see a Space Shuttle sitting on the launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are the solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at a factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs might have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site.

The railroad from the factory runs through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than a railroad track, and the railroad track is about as wide as two horses' behinds.

So a major design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was originally determined by the width of a horse's ***.
 
sprintman, from what source did you quote that factoid? There may be further interesting stuff waiting to be found.
 
Now that NASA has returned to sanity and will be using cheaper, more conventional rockets, I think we have an excellent chance to return to the Moon and even maybe make a trip to Mars.

The Ares I will be used for lifting payloads and crews into space. It can probably lift about what the Space Shuttle can do right now.

The Ares V can lift approximately three times the payload of the Saturn V rocket. This powerful rocket would make it easy to build a big space station and a trip to the Moon would probably be pretty easy. It is believed that three of these Ares V launch vehicles could be used to put a Martian manned mission spacecraft into Earth orbit, and then a Ares I could life the crew into orbit. The Ares I will generate about 3.5 gs, compared to about 3 gs for the Space Shuttle. The Ares I will probably cost a fraction as much money as the Space Shuttle.

It took a long time for NASA to wise up about launch vehicles compared to the Russians (the Russians were much more logical) but at least in the end they did wise up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom