This is one area which I think the private sector could do well in, if governments relaxed the laws concerning private space travel. I was looking at the Virgin Galactic website the other day, and some of the stuff they are developing looks very cool indeed.

The "space race" was won by the governments, but now it's over, and it's time to let private industries do most of the work.

Of course none of virgin galactic's toys comes close to actual sustained space flight. All of them are little more than a boosted aerodynamic flight with a brief spy hop into very high atmosphere, but involving energy states perhaps 1/50th that required to actually go into orbit.

(July 8, 2011 at 7:37 pm)Tiberius Wrote: This is one area which I think the private sector could do well in, if governments relaxed the laws concerning private space travel. I was looking at the Virgin Galactic website the other day, and some of the stuff they are developing looks very cool indeed.

The "space race" was won by the governments, but now it's over, and it's time to let private industries do most of the work.

Those private corporations that you love so much have an annoying tendency to dig into gas lines and electrical conduits when doing road work. I'm not so sure letting the fuckers shoot off rockets without supervision is such a great idea.

(July 8, 2011 at 7:25 pm)Chuck Wrote: Actually, it probably would be, if the replacement were also to be a shuttle like, wholly (or almost wholly) recoverable vehicle with substantial atmospheric maneuverability, and ability to make a soft landing with a large delicate payload.

The issue is, of course, there turned to be no real reason to actually use the shuttle's expensive atmospheric maneuverability, or the ability to protect a delicate large payload with an airliner like landing.

That's because the imbalance of hydrazine as well as the outdated equipment nearly made the shuttles atmospheric abilities useless.

The heat shielding and plane aspect is what makes the shuttle such an attractive prospect, with something that could, in theory or actually be developed, take multiple reentries. Something that no other production craft can do on as frequent a basis.

Unfortunately, the tiling method is imperfect and is prone to mistakes due to the sheer number of tiles, which was never reduced to larger slabs or layered in such a way to tolerate partial failure.

Then again, the heat shield of a Soyuz vessel is kaput after being ablated, so comparing the potential reusability of the shuttle to the non reusability is like comparing a car to a bike. Both have strengths, but for flexibility's sake and to accompany interplanetary transit, one needs the reusable form.

(July 8, 2011 at 7:25 pm)Chuck Wrote: The problem is the shuttle has a lot of fancy but unused ability whose influence on the shuttle design captured the public's imagination. Any more pragmatic and efficient replacement for the shuttle must dispense with these costly luxuries, and be seen by the public as much less than the shuttle it replaced.

The design was never completed. Judging an entire design class off of the STS line is like judging all cars by a Model T.

And stripping down NASA to build even more reductionist designs is not only ill advised, it is stupid. Space is expensive -- to ask NASA to build something safe and cheap is insane, especially for human travel. The selection of sub-par components and refusal of management to own up to it caused Challenger to blow, and that was when funding was much higher than it is now.

One would think that if you're going to place humans in danger, one would, I don't know, invest in it?

(July 8, 2011 at 8:23 pm)Chuck Wrote: Of course none of virgin galactic's toys comes close to actual sustained space flight. All of them are little more than a boosted aerodynamic flight with a brief spy hop into very high atmosphere, but involving energy states perhaps 1/50th that required to actually go into orbit.

Screw Virgin Galactic, SpaceX's Falcon 9 Heavy and Dragon capsule is where it's at.

(July 8, 2011 at 7:37 pm)Tiberius Wrote: This is one area which I think the private sector could do well in, if governments relaxed the laws concerning private space travel. I was looking at the Virgin Galactic website the other day, and some of the stuff they are developing looks very cool indeed.

The "space race" was won by the governments, but now it's over, and it's time to let private industries do most of the work.

I couldn't disagree more, and your selection of companies does little for your credibility on the current state of commercial reusable launch vehicles.

NASA, by virtue of not being driven for-profit, can address areas of research, much of which many businessmen would write off as having little to no return.

You can look at the lists referenced in this discussion: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/200....Eg.r.html
The official page is below.
REF: http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/

There are some things non-profit branches of the government, with those resources, will always be able to do with a far greater chance of success than a commercial entity.

And have you forgotten that most of the experts from Mercury, Gemini and Apollo days are dead or infirm now? Also, large swathes of data regarding Apollo and Saturn V have been lost and forgotten. Due to that, we may need to redo Mercury and Gemini all over again.

SpaceX is at the stage of transition between Mercury and Gemini Programs were-- that is over 30 years ago.

Had America invested a shred more interest instead of falling into it's collective asshole, it is hard to imagine where space vehicle research would be now.

Finally, you seem to grasp little of the purpose of NASA and NACA, it's predecessor. They tested and made new designs for the emerging aerospace industry and still contribute heavily to such even today. They've always served as a trusted partner for many a company, due to their lack of a for-profit motive and lack of need to screw competitors over.

I think an endeavour to go to Mars/ establish a colony there can't even be accomplished by a few governments, let alone privates... If we are to get to the stars we need the whole world on this and we ain't quite there yet...

On a completely emotional level...I'm having difficulty imagining a US that isn't sending shuttles up, our flag..USS whatever, the whole bit. My kids will be missing out on something that gave me plenty of things to dream about. Yes, I know we still have a space program, it isn't quite the same though is it? I'm profoundly upset by all of this..lol.

(July 9, 2011 at 12:57 pm)LastPoet Wrote: I think an endeavour to go to Mars/ establish a colony there can't even be accomplished by a few governments, let alone privates... If we are to get to the stars we need the whole world on this and we ain't quite there yet...

Won't be for a damn long time too. What you need is not unity: it is war.

War requires progress... harmony enables squander.

Amusing that no one has mentioned the awkward fact that America has basically lost the space race to the former Soviet Union then, since Soyuz rockets and spacecraft were and are still in active service.

>.>

(July 9, 2011 at 2:33 pm)Welsh cake Wrote: Amusing that no one has mentioned the awkward fact that America has basically lost the space race to the former Soviet Union then, since Soyuz rockets and spacecraft were and are still in active service.

>.>

I never cared about a race.

Quote:If we are to get to the stars we need the whole world on this and we ain't quite there yet...

Most of the world still squats to shit in the dirt. They won't be of much help getting to Mars. Western Europe, Canada, China, Japan, S Korea and the US if we get our heads out of our asses should get the job done.