Market for space odysseys growing astronomically

Times Online ^ | 3 Sep 06 | David Robertson

[saganite]

Good article but interestingly doesn't mention the most important recent success and that's the launch of Bigelow Aerospace's inflatable module.

[saganite]

ping

[Jaysun]

The shuttle programme began to be wound down, aspirations for the International Space Station were scaled back......

Can someone please tell me the point of that Tom Joad shitwagon? Is it a floating tree house designed to help us hang out with a couple of Russians? I currently live in Huntsville Alabama which is where the Marshall Space Flight Center and the US Space and Rocket Center is located. I have several friends that work in the industry and I can't get a straight answer to my question. I get a lot of BS answers about testing the effects of space on this or that substance, but that's it. Nothing has come of it so far as I can tell.

And I don't know what we've spent all the billions upon billions on. The International Space Station is so low-rent, the only thing missing is a pink flamingo and a clothes dryer on the porch.

[saganite]

You can pretty much ignore anything NASA related in this post as they won't accomplish anything mentioned. The real news is the private sector moving into space in a big way.

[cripplecreek]

I get a lot of BS answers about testing the effects of space on this or that substance, but that's it. Nothing has come of it so far as I can tell.

Those things are important but I agree that we need to see some results.

Personally I think we should be working on shielding against radiation for longer duration missions outside the cocoon.

[supercat]

Is it a floating tree house designed to help us hang out with a couple of Russians?

What does the ISS have that the Shuttle doesn't, aside from larger stores of habitation supplies and generators?

[saganite]

Check out the Bigelow module. It's more resistant to radiation and micro meteorites than the ISS.

[mugs99]

Been in orbit since July 12 and not even a mention?

[Jaysun]

You can pretty much ignore anything NASA related in this post as they won't accomplish anything mentioned. The real news is the private sector moving into space in a big way.

Okay. But even that seems a bit absurd. Tourism? Is that it? I'll admit that I'm a bit disgusted with the whole affair. It seems so pointless to me. Maybe exploring the universe is a laudable goal, but even if a Martian Land Rover beamed back a picture of God struggling with the childproof cap on a bottle of Mylanta, I'm not sure what we paid for that cosmic Kodak moment wouldn't have been better spent somewhere else - anywhere else.

The guys that work at NASA here are into everything from dinosaur bones to the "global warming" farce. I mean, it's as if we're spending billions of dollars so that some godd***ed atheist can try to disprove the existence of God. I think it's absurd. I know that many think otherwise. I'll get over it.

[monkapotamus]

[cripplecreek]

It's off topic but the ESA has an interesting photo sequence from SMART 1 and I don't expect there will be many more.

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/SMART-1/index.html

[burzum]

Can someone please tell me the point of that Tom Joad ****wagon? Is it a floating tree house designed to help us hang out with a couple of Russians? I currently live in Huntsville Alabama which is where the Marshall Space Flight Center and the US Space and Rocket Center is located. I have several friends that work in the industry and I can't get a straight answer to my question. I get a lot of BS answers about testing the effects of space on this or that substance, but that's it. Nothing has come of it so far as I can tell.

No need for vulgarities.

The ISS does serve some purposes, but it certainly isn't worth the ~$100 billion lifetime development cost. The research and engineering knowhow that it will teach probably isn't worth more than $5 billion. To summarize the ~$5 billion usefulness of the ISS: it teaches us how to build and assemble complex 10-20 ton life-support components that are launched into space with with about 3 Gs of force. This is certainly important, but overrated. It serves three purposes: 1) it helps us with our next generation of 20 ton component space stations (perhaps around the Moon or Mars), 2) it gives us a little technical knowhow if we want to start launching 100 ton components with a 5 G rocket, and 3) it gives us a little knowledge on how to make a life support compartment for an interplanetary mission.

It is useful to acknowledge that when the Ares V program comes online, the US will no longer be required to play with 10 shuttle flights to assemble and provide supplies for 8 15-ton components. A 130 ton (or optionally higher) Ares V rocket could do that in one launch. The final mass of the ISS, for example, could be put up with 3 Ares V rockets. The biggest winners from the ISS program will be the Russians and the Europeans--the ones who are paying less than half the cost.

[saganite]

Nah, tourism is just a money generator to get some positive cash flow and keep the accomplishments in the public eye. There are more important goals these guys are shooting for. For instance, Bigelow is studying the possiblity of supplying their inflatable modules to the military for sattelite repairs. Turns out their design makes them very stealthy and the military wants to carry out unobserved updates and repairs in space.

[Jaysun]

What does the ISS have that the Shuttle doesn't, aside from larger stores of habitation supplies and generators?

My point exactly. WTF is that thing?

[Jaysun]

Nah, tourism is just a money generator to get some positive cash flow and keep the accomplishments in the public eye. There are more important goals these guys are shooting for. For instance, Bigelow is studying the possiblity of supplying their inflatable modules to the military for sattelite repairs. Turns out their design makes them very stealthy and the military wants to carry out unobserved updates and repairs in space.

Good. I fully support military related spending in space. These other projects seem a waste. The largest justification is that we're developing technologies that will help us further what we've already been doing. In other words, perhaps we'll put a flag and a golf ball on some other lifeless sphere someday. Oh the joy.

[Jaysun]

Thanks for your response. It's not far from the normal responses I get from those employed in this field. But I look at everything you said and ask, "To what end?" We went to the moon. I was disappointed to find that it was not made of cheese, as I'm sure most others were. But what did we really gain? And what do we hope to gain in the future?

[saganite]

Sorry you feel that way. I fully support space based exploration and research. I just happen to believe that NASA has totally lost it's way and is nothing more than a bloated bureaucracy. The private space exploration groups on the other hand are spending their own money, not the taxpayers, to do what NASA can't or won't do. I expect that within the next 20 years the privately funded groups will surpass NASA and make it irrelevant.

[Jaysun]

Neat stuff. I have a telescope at home and hope to see the impact.

[saganite]

Do they plan on sending images right up to impact?

[cripplecreek]

I hope they can give us images till impact.