Skip to comments.
Manifest Destiny in Outer Space
The Washington Times ^
| 7/2/03
| Robert Zubrin
Posted on 07/02/2003 2:30:07 PM PDT by My2Cents
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:04:48 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
1
posted on
07/02/2003 2:30:08 PM PDT
by
My2Cents
To: msdrby
PING
2
posted on
07/02/2003 2:33:39 PM PDT
by
Prof Engineer
( Texans don't even care where Europe is on the map.)
To: My2Cents
Bump for Mars.
3
posted on
07/02/2003 2:37:14 PM PDT
by
jimt
To: RightWhale
Ours. ours, ours, ours.
4
posted on
07/02/2003 2:38:13 PM PDT
by
Chancellor Palpatine
(...girls with good bodies like boys with Ferraris...girls don't like boys, girls like cars and money)
To: My2Cents
5
posted on
07/02/2003 2:38:21 PM PDT
by
Sam Cree
(Democrats are herd animals)
To: My2Cents
Bring back Orion!
To: jimt
Bump for Mars. MBA FOR MR UPS
7
posted on
07/02/2003 2:50:04 PM PDT
by
ActionNewsBill
(Police state? What police state?)
To: My2Cents
Gee can we send Sheila Jackson Lee there so she can see the American flag we put there back in the 60's? Lets send her ahead of the ERV, say about 2 years before?
8
posted on
07/02/2003 2:57:11 PM PDT
by
AFreeBird
To: My2Cents
Rather, by freeing the Shuttle launch stack of the orbiter, and giving it a hydrogen/oxygen upper stage instead, we reconfigure it into a true heavy lift launch vehicle capable of duplicating the performance of the Saturn V. With such a system, we could deliver 120 metric tons to low Earth orbit (in place of the current Shuttle's 20), or send payloads in the 50-ton class on direct trajectories to the moon or Mars.I like it!
To: My2Cents
Humans to Mars.Robots to everywhere.
To: RoughDobermann
I like it!I don't. Why retrofit the shuttle lift system when Energiya boosters can be bought off-the-shelf? And we don't need the crew transfer vehicle, either: Soyuz works just fine.
The existing, unlaunched ISS modules are designed to be carried by the Shuttle. No problem: send the Shuttle up unmanned with its payload, and send the installation crew up with a Soyuz.
To: My2Cents
The real key to any sucess in space is cheap launch. And I mean, really really cheap launch.
When you can do that, then you don't need to spend so much time/money developing a space vehicle, cause if it fails in orbit, who cares? It didn't cost much to get it there, and you can just try again.
Expendable boosters are a stupid idea. Sure, they're the cheapest option now, because the NRE has already been spent. But the idea is to get a totally reusable, air breathing launch vehicle, designed at whatever cost it takes. Once you can get to orbit by just adding more fuel, THEN it's cheap.
But, government doesn't want it cheap. As long as its expensive, then they have a monopoly, and the bureaucrats keep their jobs. And then there's the security thing. If all it takes is airliner type money to buy an orbital vehicle, then Osama will buy one and then where will be be?
In the end, going to Mars or anywhere else will be limited by the difficulting in getting that first 100 miles.
As Ronald Reagan said, "Government is not the solution to our problem, government IS the problem".
12
posted on
07/02/2003 3:10:55 PM PDT
by
narby
(I love the smell of Liberal fear in the morning...)
To: narby
Very insightful comments. From everything I have read and seen, you have nailed it.
13
posted on
07/02/2003 3:14:31 PM PDT
by
Hegemony Cricket
(The Heart of the King is in the Hand of the Lord.)
To: My2Cents
Mars offers the most scientifically, socially and in terms of what it portends for the future of humankind. When Zubrin hit on the idea of social implications, he gave the strongest rational support to his project. Man on Mars could be the beginning of the end of social upheaval in the Middle East.
14
posted on
07/02/2003 3:14:40 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(gazing at shadows)
To: Physicist
Personally, I'd rather we use a US launch system than buy it from the Russians.
To: My2Cents
I believe we should can the shuttle! And use only un-manned ships. They will have no loss of life, if any problems occur. Use robots instead. And the vehicles can go much farther into space, than a manned ship. Plus it is much cheaper to fly un-manned ships. Less weight, less energy to explore. More efficient and safe to explore farther into space!
16
posted on
07/02/2003 3:19:26 PM PDT
by
ibtheman
Comment #17 Removed by Moderator
To: RightWhale
Man on Mars could be the beginning of the end of social upheaval in the Middle East.I think I catch your drift: "An independent Palestinian state -- MARS!"
18
posted on
07/02/2003 3:22:38 PM PDT
by
My2Cents
("Well....there you go again.")
To: RoughDobermann; Physicist
"I like it! "I don't like it either. Got to go with Physicist on this one.
The priority is space should be "military superiority". I like some of the new military plans.
Other than that the funds would be better spend pursuing either better energy sources like "Fusion" or physics.
Fusion or other energy sources has practical ramifications here at home as well as the potential to make any space exploration safer and more rewarding.
Physics - We are having a lot of advances in learning more about the fundamental nature of things. What if we learn something that makes space travel easier or quicker or allows us an easier or quicker way to terraform Mars. Plus the military implications of this research are phenomenal.
I like the idea of colonizing Mars, I just think the timing is wrong.
19
posted on
07/02/2003 3:23:47 PM PDT
by
DannyTN
(Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
To: RoughDobermann
Personally, I'd rather we use a US launch system than buy it from the Russians.Oh, sure! But the launch system we have is a multi-billion-dollar death trap, while a new American one is years away (even a retrofit), and we have stuff to launch in the near term.
I say limp along with the Russian stuff for a while, and in the meantime design something really revolutionary, like a VASIMR engine.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson