Author Topic: Going to the moon.  (Read 3005 times)

Lundgren

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 4441
  • Banned
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #25 on: October 16, 2010, 08:05:40 AM »
Damn.  Bleaker than not finding inner peace at the Sea of Tranquility.  :(
Ironic as the first american's had it tuff as balls, Starvation, freezing, and barreness were the norm. Life is pointless without a direction. The trick is believing you really wanna get there.
Be cool to be left behind like the abandoned cityscapes in blade runner while everyone is running about colonizing.  :)
Good luck being trapped on a planet with few resources no room to grow, and a serious overpopulation problem.

Jaime

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4933
  • North Pole, fucking elves left, right and centre.
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #26 on: October 16, 2010, 08:12:12 AM »
No, 99% of the population would have left, the poorest are the first to seek new horizons.

It would have all of the stuff the colonists would be working their asses off building on some far away planet or ship, but already there.

No population problems.

Technology to do whatever you like.

I just don't see the point in the pursuit of nothing in particular.
Trans Milkshake.

YngiweRhoads

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
  • Shreddin'
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #27 on: October 16, 2010, 08:18:45 AM »
Obama has, for all intents and purposes, grounded Nasa.

India's space program looks promising. No joke.
6

Lundgren

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 4441
  • Banned
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #28 on: October 16, 2010, 08:40:58 AM »
Obama has, for all intents and purposes, grounded Nasa.

India's space program looks promising. No joke.
ROFLMAO, He's giving a massive amount of support to private enterprise to push space forward. So ironic that a liberal that privatises space, gets so much shit. In a decade Spacex has got the cost of launch to space cut down by a factor of ten. There's companies like bigelow aerospace, that are getting the cost of building space stations for 1/10 th the cost of ISS. These two companies alone are putting american's years ahead of the asians or euro's.

YngiweRhoads

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
  • Shreddin'
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #29 on: October 16, 2010, 08:52:51 AM »
ROFLMAO, He's giving a massive amount of support to private enterprise to push space forward. So ironic that a liberal that privatises space, gets so much shit. In a decade Spacex has got the cost of launch to space cut down by a factor of ten. There's companies like bigelow aerospace, that are getting the cost of building space stations for 1/10 th the cost of ISS. These two companies alone are putting american's years ahead of the asians or euro's.

That's good news to my ear....errr...eyes. Why pull support for Nasa if he's using taxpayer funds to support private firms? ie. Cancelling the moon mission and pulling funding for the shuttle replacement and such?
6

Lundgren

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 4441
  • Banned
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #30 on: October 16, 2010, 08:59:25 AM »
That's good news to my ear....errr...eyes. Why pull support for Nasa if he's using taxpayer funds to support private firms? ie. Cancelling the moon mission and pulling funding for the shuttle replacement and such?
Because they still hiring americans do the work. The tax money stays in america. Also it'll maintain american dominance in the industry. Also it provides loads of room for nasa to expand in the future. NASA should be about research not production.

Nasa should learn to delegate basic tasks. The tech of getting into orbit hasn't changed in 50 years. So why are we getting researchers to design rockets. The only improvements that are to be made are in efficiency something govs fail at and enterprise thrives. Nasa still has to figure out alot of things, but rocket design, is not on the list. There's still food production, probes, research, and 100 other things.

It's like getting a bunch of chemist together to make beer, it's overkill and that's what nasa is all about. Sure create a new beer, but hand it over to industry to improve, not a bunch of nerds that just sit around all day thinking up the most overcomplicated crap.

YngiweRhoads

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
  • Shreddin'
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #31 on: October 16, 2010, 09:01:39 AM »
Because they still hiring americans do the work. The tax money stays in america. Also it'll maintain american dominance in the industry. Also it provides loads of room for nasa to expand in the future. NASA should be about research not production.

Nasa should learn to delegate basic tasks. The tech of getting into orbit hasn't changed in 50 years. So why are we getting researchers to design rockets. The only improvements that are to be made are in efficiency something govs fail at and enterprise thrives. Nasa still has to figure out alot of things, but rocket design, is not on the list. There's still food production, probes, research, and 100 other things.

It's like getting a bunch of chemist together to make beer, it's overkill and that's what nasa is all about. Sure create a new beer, but hand it over to industry to improve, not a bunch of nerds that just sit around all day thinking up the most overcomplicated crap.


Yeah, they have been talking more about streamlining their approach to space exploration and about researching new, more cost effective technologies.
6

Lundgren

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 4441
  • Banned
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #32 on: October 16, 2010, 09:06:31 AM »

Yeah, they have been talking more about streamlining their approach to space exploration and about researching new, more cost effective technologies.
And the COTS program is how to do it.
Thing is nasa should be designing nuclear engines, that's were they wold have a role. NASA was abot creating novel ways to do things which was good when they haven't been done. But for the last 30 years they've just being trying to find out novel ways to repeat the past cough cough Orion.

Fatpanda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9676
  • One getbigger to rule them all.
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #33 on: October 16, 2010, 09:07:54 AM »
I'm sure even those will have occupancy limits, Jumbo.

poor chimps still trying in vain to own be by making jibes about me being fat hahaha

heres a hint: all the childish insults you can come up with don't bother me,  not can they change the fact i wouldn't go for a beer with an old fag like you !  :-*
175lbs by 31st July

YngiweRhoads

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
  • Shreddin'
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #34 on: October 16, 2010, 09:13:10 AM »
And the COTS program is how to do it.
Thing is nasa should be designing nuclear engines, that's were they wold have a role. NASA was abot creating novel ways to do things which was good when they haven't been done. But for the last 30 years they've just being trying to find out novel ways to repeat the past cough cough Orion.

Something like this? ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA
6

Lundgren

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 4441
  • Banned
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #35 on: October 16, 2010, 09:18:09 AM »
Something like this? ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA
Yeah basically. Would get the cost of traveling from Orbit to mars near zero, after the overhead of course. We got getting into orbit pretty cheap. With cheap space travel, we can really expand into manfacturing, agriculture, and mining.

Lundgren

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 4441
  • Banned
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #36 on: October 16, 2010, 10:55:40 AM »
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1485155465058882626#


i ws posting a message on the girl board...and saw youre thread

cheers


Apparently Toxic avenger is still around.

MikMaq

  • Guest
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #37 on: December 12, 2012, 07:44:55 AM »
We should really go if that is what op is getting at.

Mr Nobody

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40197
  • Falcon gives us new knowledge every single day.
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #38 on: December 12, 2012, 07:51:54 AM »
Damn.  Bleaker than not finding inner peace at the Sea of Tranquility.  :(
Exactly.

daddy8ball

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 958
  • Violence is not the answer. It is the question.
Re: Going to the moon.
« Reply #39 on: December 12, 2012, 08:35:42 AM »
The answer is "yes".