gman42's Page

More from gman42

Forum Posts

Comments

Posted on: POLL: Should NASA Send Astronauts Back to the Moon...
at 07/08/2009 1:01pm

Throw in the discovery of uranium ores and there's now a lot of good reasons to go back. It would make launching a ... more(+)

cpumasterwv wrote:It seems to make sense to establish a presence on the moon. Less gravity, untapped resources; it would definatly make Mars trips much more cost effective.

Throw in the discovery of uranium ores and there's now a lot of good reasons to go back. It would make launching a nuclear based craft to mars much, much easier technically and politically. close(-)

Posted on: What type(s) of space vehicles do we need?
at 06/29/2009 12:01pm

I would have to respectfully disagree, SS2 has very few qualities like a spacecraft as we know them. It's duration in ... more(+)

Danzi wrote:

I was mainly meaning re-usable, and not have differnet stages that fall to earth and can never be reused.

Sure the Virgin space craft doest go fa,r, but it is a space craft - A space craft being somthing which flies in space, how can you argue with that logic, i mean, they go higher up that the FAI/FIA's(?) official deffinition of where space starts after the atmosphere, and the people who go on them are technically astronaughts

I would have to respectfully disagree, SS2 has very few qualities like a spacecraft as we know them. It's duration in space is roughly 15 minutes, it's not really flying in space, just following a ballistic course. It does not have a heat shield that spacecraft as we know them need. It has no way to maneuver in space , ie. thrusters, maneuvering jets. Again it's speed is roughly 4000 mph, not very close to orbital speeds.

All in all it isn't anything that we would need for a true spacecraft. Is it a first stepping stone? definitely. To actually fly into space and operate the vessel would take a larger vessel, for the fuel , then add weight for the heat shield and then add weight for the life support. The thing would be way to heavy to be launched from a plane. close(-)

Posted on: What type(s) of space vehicles do we need?
at 06/27/2009 1:02pm

Virgin Galactic doesn't really have a spacecraft, it's more of a glorified aircraft with a rocket engine. It doesn't ... more(+)

Danzi wrote:Why cant we fully re-usable space ships, e.g. Virgin Galactic space ship. Why do we have to use rockets that can largely NOT be used again. I mean, why cant we make ships such as the shuttles that be act like a ferry and go from Earth, stop and ISS then land on a runway built on the moon? I know to start with they would have to use Apollo type landers to do this and lay the runway, but why cant they eventually do that

I just dont get why NASA and most other space agency's use non-reusable shuttles! I know its a lot smaller but Virgin Galactic are the ones moving in the right direction!!

Virgin Galactic doesn't really have a spacecraft, it's more of a glorified aircraft with a rocket engine. It doesn't get anywhere to the speeds of a the Shuttle and will never get into orbit.

Technically the capabilities that Virgin has is 1960's NASA technology. close(-)

Posted on: What type(s) of space vehicles do we need?
at 06/27/2009 12:20am

IMHO We really need just one spacecraft. What I mean is a true spacecraft that is a "space-only" spaceship ... more(+)

IMHO We really need just one spacecraft. What I mean is a true spacecraft that is a "space-only" spaceship designed to operate and travel in space for extended times. All of today's spaceships owe their design's and limitations from the launcher that puts them in space. The perfect analogy for a true spaceship is a sea going vessel that only operates at sea over a lifetime. close(-)

This user has not commented on any articles or features...