It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by MrWendal
So how do you figure that money wont be a problem?
Because you would have the same rhetoric no matter how much is spent on space. Once again, the truth is, the money would be negligible. In 2012, NASA manned spaceflight budget accounted for 0.21 % of federal budget. It is a problem of political will, not money. If there was even a little political will, cuts could easily be made somewhere else.
We already have 2 spaceports. 1 in New Mexico - Spaceport America - 1 in California - The Mojave Air & Space Port
Its not a spaceport in my book unless the craft achieves stable orbit. Suborbital flights are closer to aeroplanes than spaceships. Without government funding, there will be no manned spaceflight for a long time to come.
Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Eurisko2012
SpaceX is indeed promising, but again, without government money I doubt we would see anything more than com satellites being launched by their rockets, if even that.
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
SpaceX will be docking with the ISS.
Check out the Dragon!
- This will work -
The glass is half full.edit on 1-2-2012 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
Originally posted by indigothefish
reply to post by anon72
this is more of an example to me that newt is on board with spending tons of money on things that won't help any economic, social or war/peace struggle problems. it would be a great distraction though.edit on 2/1/2012 by indigothefish because: (no reason given)
Newt is already on record saying the - private sector - would do it with a little help from
the government. The US government might give them a phone call. " Watch out for
space junk over here and other there!"
On 8 December 2010, a Falcon 9 rocket lifted off from Cape Canaveral in Florida, carrying an uncrewed SpaceX Dragon on COTS Demo Flight 1. The launch was a success, and the Dragon cleanly separated from the Falcon approximately 10 minutes after launch. Three hours of orbital maneuvering tests were conducted at an altitude of 300 kilometres (190 mi; 160 nmi) before a deorbit burn was conducted, putting the Dragon on a re-entry course that ended in a successful splashdown in the Pacific Ocean, approximately 800 kilometres (500 mi; 430 nmi) west of Mexico's Pacific coast.[45]
Genesis II was launched on June 28, 2007, at 15:02 UTC. As with Genesis I, it was launched aboard an ISC Kosmotras Dnepr rocket from Dombarovskiy missile base near Yasniy, Russia. It successfully reached orbit after separation from the rocket at 15:16 UTC. Due to the mechanics of its orbit, first contact with the craft was established once it passed over SpaceQuest, Ltd.'s Fairfax, Virginia receiving station at 22:20 UTC, confirming that it was alive and functioning nominally with power and air pressure at expected levels.[5][6][7]
Originally posted by desert
When the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the race was on. Although Kennedy would talk of cooperation, the two nations ended up going it alone, and America became first to the moon, even though he at times even wondered if his idea could be accomplished.
We're not in a nationalistic competitive mode as the first time to the moon, so there is no Great Race. Even though govt came up with the space race moon venture, private companies used govt contracts to build what was needed. Newt awards prize money, what happens next? To stay in business, the company needs customers.
I'm looking out now towards the Mojave airport/spaceport, and I think it's been seven years since the idea of space tourist took hold there, but I don't see all the tourists lined up at gates with their $200,000 ticket to pay for what amounts to a short, fun, exhilarating space ride. (Weren;t there X15 pilots awarded astronaut wings?)
There are exciting private ideas beyond launching satellites, but a moon base in eight years? That is not a realistic timeline, no matter how exciting an idea.edit on 4-2-2012 by desert because: oops
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
I predict we will have Moon Base Alpha 1 up and running by 2015.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
I predict we will have Moon Base Alpha 1 up and running by 2015.
OK, it's the second month of 2012. I'm willing to bet you $1000 (I would bet a lot more, but that's all spare cash I have) that there is no base on the moon in 2015,
Will you accept the bet?
Thanks.
Originally posted by desert
It's 2012, and I'm still waiting for 2001....2001: A Space Odyssey, that is. Saw it in 1969 and could hardly wait for 2001. ...I'm still waiting for the flying cars promised back in the 1950's-60, and where's my food replicator like in Star Trek...wait, that's still in the future...must wait more time...a long time...I could be dead...but if for some reason I were still alive, I'll probably have to buy the extra, special additive upgrade to make it taste "just like homemade."
There's a reason we say "aim for the stars." It's good to have a goal in order to stretch one's imagination and endeavors, but the reality is that we'll fall short but still be in a good place, a place we can build on for the next try.
This article has an explanation why there's not the rush to the moon as we once thought would happen for economic reasons.
Oh, yeah, and I want Rosie the robot to clean my house and do the dishes.
Originally posted by desert
This article has an explanation why there's not the rush to the moon as we once thought would happen for economic reasons.
Originally posted by Diablos
Only people with no scientific or engineering and ignorants would even believe Newt's nonsensical proposition. It is exactly what Romney said about this man. He knows there is a big aerospace industry in Florida, so he's just telling them what they want to hear.
Space travel is a dead end and we humans will never get into space (We are just simply not smart enough nor we have the resources). Hell, we aren't smart enough to even calculate the radiation levels at the event horizon of a black hole.
The future of science is in nanotechnology and robotics.
Originally posted by Hellas
How's he going to establish the base up there? He would have to use the Russian launching sites..