Originally posted by KrazyHorse
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Happy Moon Day!
Collapse
X
-
Last edited by DanS; July 21, 2009, 11:22.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
-
Originally posted by KrazyHorse View PostIn order for humanity to conquer the universe we're going to need a revolution in fundamental physics, not to spend a ****load of money perfecting primitive rocket tech.
However, it should be noted that right now mostly we are living off of and building off of the investments of the 1950s and very early 1960s, not the Apollo program. Because of the fabulous expense, we threw away the Apollo technology.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
Comment
-
Originally posted by SlowwHand View PostCongrats, KH. You were able to complete a thought process in only 3 posts. You damned dumbass.Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld
Comment
-
Originally posted by DanS View PostThat's a straw man, KH. Primitive rocket tech is more than good enough to conquer the solar system, f.e.Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld
Comment
-
Originally posted by SlowwHand View PostWhy buy off the Soviets?I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
Comment
-
Originally posted by Lorizael View PostBut it would take for-****ing-ever. We need drives with higher specific impulses so that we don't have to rely on fuel-efficient but painfully slow transfer orbits.
Chemical rocketry is good. It works. Fuel efficiency is not very important for many aspects of conquering this solar system. For the the areas where chemical propulsion isn't optimal, the tech that we already have on electrical propulsion is more than sufficient.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
Comment
-
Originally posted by Lorizael View Postwwjd.
He'd ban Sloww for all eternity in the fiery pits of Hell.“As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
"Capitalism ho!"
Comment
-
Originally posted by DanS View PostThis doesn't make any sense. Chemical rocketry is low specific impulse, high thrust. Because of this, if you want to do things quickly in the solar system, you rely on chemical rocketry.
Chemical rocketry is good. It works. Fuel efficiency is not very important for conquering this solar system.Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld
Comment
-
Your complaint about chemical propulsion was that it would take a long time to do something. I pointed out that this was not so. If you want high thrust (do things quickly), rely on chemical propulsion. Simple.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
Comment
-
Originally posted by DanS View PostThey make good rockets. Better than ours. But like the US, they are living off the 50s and very early 60s technology.Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
"Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ Braindead
Comment
-
Er, my problem with chemical propulsion is that the enormous amount of fuel required to produce the thrust necessary to deviate from a Hohmann transfer orbit makes traveling to the outer planets extremely expensive. If you want to get to outer planets quickly, you need to use a fuel efficient engine to keep cost and weight down.Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
"We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld
Comment
-
It's not just the initial launch, Sloww. The Russian rockets are much safer and less expensive than anything we've built.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
Comment
-
The Russian rockets are much safer and less expensive than anything we've built.Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
"Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten View PostHow 'bout we use the money we send to Israel every year?
I think you should let us manage your space program alltogether, we're rather ... frugal.
"We already waste a bunch of money on X so it doesn't matter if we waste a bunch of money on Y" is not a valid argument.
Do you have a bunch of maxed out credit cards, by the way?
It's not. It's (sort of) a political realities issue. The US public would never agree to to use this money for covering debt or something like improvement of education. I think such a solution for actually creating something productive, for engagement in a space race is good propoganda.
Look how it works for the US military - they are spending money on development and construction of platforms destined to find an enemy that doesn't exist. If one uses this leverage, and keeps talking about a future scenario where the chinese colonize the Moon, Mars, or Alpha Centauri, you might as well see a divertment of funds, to prevent the slant-eyes from winning.
NASA just doesn't know how to press the right buttons. They are trying to pander to the nerd nieche, when they should be fear-mongering like the rest of them.
Comment
Comment