Science!

It's worth noting that this doesn't mean that there aren't still outbreaks.  It just means that there are no local cases of measles.  So our measles are no longer homegrown but are imported from other continents!  That's what cause the outbreak that started at Disney and then spread through parts of California because some people won't protect their children and the community at large from deadly infection diseases.  Thanks a lot, Alicia Silverstone. And I loved you in Clueless.  Didn't realize you were type cast.

On a tangentially related note, if you want to eradicate diseases with your friends, I highly recommend the board game Pandemic.  Hours of fun for everyone.  The expansion for it even lets you play as a bioterrorist!

I am hijacking this thread and turning it into one about science and space exploration! Kudos B. Hieronymus Da!

What are the some of the hopes, goals, and ideas you wish to see in the future of space policy and space exploration?

For me, I think we (NASA, for we Americans here) should keep the Orion Program under development, and keep our eye on Mars and the asteroid redirect, but to also return to the moon, expand on the ISS, and maintain some kind of constant Manned LEO capability. I think we're missing an important step in the latter to Mars by focusing on it while neglecting a return to the Moon. Orion itself is very reminiscent of the old Apollo Spacecraft, and there are several systems to how it will work.

Of course, I also believe in full tilt putting our Space Budget at least at 4-5% of the National GDP. Right now, it's barely half of 1%.

As far as Launch Vehicles go, I think the SLS is a bold plan that relies on a bit of flawed reasoning to make a more powerful rocket. Personally, I think we could bring back the Saturn V and the Rocketdyne F-1 Engines for an unmanned Payload capability to the Moon, and use existing LEO Launch Vehicles to assemble manned vehicles in space. That said, it's good we're going back to the stacked format rather than relying on the ultra-complex Shuttle. However, the Shuttle was near perfect for its ability to be launched relatively rapidly, and its recycled nature saved money in building additional launch systems for spacecraft. 

Comparison of Saturn V and SLS. Honestly... I think it's a little too optimistic. Block 1 and Block 2 for a different system seems redundant when we can essentially remake the Saturn V and upgrade them with modern tech.




Imagining of how the Orion Spacecraft will fly.



Rocket Science, kids.

Well, most of those answers follow - I think - when you ask the question: Why go to Mars?

I know why we should go to Mars. Thus I also think that goal should shape how we go about to do it.

This world doesn't need humans to populate the plains, forests, seas or air. On the contrary, the Earth pays a heavy price for harbouring humans.
The only thing that can justify the immense investment Earth has done in the human, is to spread life to other worlds. ...And space. That's our role, our duty, our purpose.

It's an extremely long term project to colonize Mars. But since it must be done, work on it must be ongoing.
The first trip to Mars must be done right. That means it shouldn't be shoe-string project on a minimal budget. That's just insane. That would, in the best case, just be a short exciting adventure and then everyone would be relieved that we made it and no one would do it again in another 70 years. But it's also very likely that such an adventure would end up in a tragedy, meaning it wouldn't be done again.

Going to Mars is a very big and ambitious project. Having our act together, must mean having acquired familiarity, routine, methods and reliable equipment through first working the Moon thoroughly.

Beef up the budget. Go back to the Moon first. We're not going to Mars in order to thrill the public or check off an item on a bucket list. We're going to Mars because we one day intend to live there. And that's an extremely hard thing to do. So get our act together. Do it right. Do it safe. And do it big.

They weren't that wasteful. The Saturn is the Launch Vehicle. It's meant to be expendable. The Spacecraft itself was very efficient.

What is meant is that the S-V was a staged rocket, as most systems are. A staged rocket is much easier than a single stage, since it has to carry all the fuel and resources itself. Rather, the S-V was divided into 3 separate stages, which would separate, and use newer engines to continuously propel it and give it the velocity it needed to attain Earth Orbit, but then also carry the rocket powerful enough to launch the Apollo Spacecraft beyond Low Earth Orbit.

If money/resources were no object, my plan would be this:

Goal: Maintain Low Earth Orbit capability, return to the Moon capability, Moon habitation colony, Asteroid Redirect mission, and Mars exploration system.

What we need: System to get us to Low Earth Orbit, System to return to the Moon, System to take us to both Asteroid and Mars. Habitation facilities for Moon, and Mars Return Vehicle. We would also need a system of communications satellites that would be resistant to energetic solar emissions.

My plan: Bring back the Space Shuttle and use it to maintain our Low Earth Orbit capability (ISS, etc.) Use the Saturn V carry ultra-heavy payloads to Earth Orbit, and use the Space Shuttle to assemble a Deep Space Habitation Module for the Asteroid/Mars Spacecraft, and use the Space Shuttle to assemble the Moon habitation technology. Focus on the Block II SLS as the Launch vehicle for the Orion Spacecraft and its propulsion system for Deep Space missions. To return to the moon, use a modified Saturn V to carry Orion to the Moon, as well as use it as the payload system for lunar habitation modules.

Roles for each Launch System:

Shuttle: LEO transportation, payload, assembly platform.

Saturn V: Beyond-LEO Lunar Transportation Launch Vehicle for Orion, payload carrier to LEO and Beyond-LEO (Lunar).

SLS Block II: Beyond-LEO Asteroid/Martian Launch Vehicle for Orion, carrier for propulsion system for Orion.

The role of Commercial Space Groups (SpaceX, Boeing, Orbital ATK, etc.) cannot be understated: They'd be responsible for developing many of the technologies for habitation, propulsion, and deep space habitable modules in conjunction with NASA. Also, use it to transport additional payloads to LEO. Maintain our presence and payloads on the ISS with them. They would also be responsible for the Mars Return Vehicle, possibly a spaceplane that would descend to Mars and have the power to return to Mars orbit.

Mars mission walk-through: Shuttle assembles habitation module Orion spacecraft in space. SLS launches Orion Spacecraft and Propulsion system, docks with habitation module in orbit, combines it with Martian Return Vehicle for 3 systems, then carries it to Mars. Return vehicle goes to/returns from Mars, docks with Orion in orbit. On the way back, the MRV is dropped off at the moon and repaired at existing Lunar facilities put in place. The rest of Orion returns to Earth, and the Orion Crew Module separates from Habitation module and jettisons propulsion module (which burns up in atmosphere). Orion Spacecraft returns crew to Earth.

Dream plan; and it's eminently achievable.

More like incomplete science, as opposed to outright bad science. The only thing really missing is to make sure to repeat the experiment to make sure your results aren't a fluke.

Nah, WE get Captain Kirk (born in Iowa). You get William Shatner!

I heard he was kind of a jerk. I know he and Marc Garneau don't get along.

...My own contribution had a lot to do with space and science.

if there going to be serious about space exploration then the thing to focus on must be gravatic field manipulation, there's literally zero reason why you need to waste so much energy escaping earths field, and for longer term sustainable stuff figuring out how to cancel gravity's effect on mass inside a planetary body will be a must, not to mention some form of gravitational shielding for space flight so you don't have the problems created by space dust travelling towards you at thousands of kph constantly hitting your armour plating and stressing it ... never mind the bigger stuff

you might not be able to overcome sheer forces through gravtic field science but you can do a heck of a lot with it, and its not like nobody figured out how to do this stuff, geeks have been building anti grav party tricks for years to lift up skirts, so why not make serious headway into using it to make space program(s) cheaper and more ecologically sound ?

other than that I would be happy to see them produce stuff like the guardian lasers and pulse weaponry as well as rail guns or mac's because no matter what your doing if you don't have a way to shoot down a rock you didn't see due to a sensor blind spot your toast, oh and they will need to make 3d fabricator units as well, capable of producing any ship parts (including ammo for the weapons) from component minerals so its somewhat safer to travel in deep space on longer range missions....

but of course for interstellar travel you would need much better sensors quantum communicators and emp proof computers with enough storage to hold every bit of data the planet has ever produced ...

which likely all means much better nuclear tech for the electrical generator systems as well ....

lab geeks made a miniature device that runs on a battery utilising magnetics and electric coils  that floats (as long as the battery lasts) and cancels gravity on birds skirts in the 1950's

they couldn't figure out how to build a bigger one that lasted longer than a few minutes because of power technology back then but new options have become available since then except nobody has bothered to look at it again (that's why so much sci-fi stuff revolves around gravity manipulation and electromagnetic shielding) but since then neodymium has been discovered as have several other things that could make this possible.

and once you figure out the gravity cancelling thing (most of the projects were shut down in the 70's due to power problems although new projects have started in the last few years thanks to JPL and its sponsors wanting to save money) creating the MAC (or rail gun) will be relatively simple, well that's if you dismiss the rumours about a certain US warships already having experimental ones fitted to them)

quantum communicators and computers have already been built (both in continental north America and china, probably in Russia as well) and proven to work, now there trying to work out how to create that stuff on a practical level in order to use it, nothing a bit more money and a few more egg heads thrown at it couldn't sort in a relatively short space of time

plasma weapons and lasers have been around since the 50's, the uk is finally building megawatt cannons for ground based anti missile networks, they might not be similar to the plasma weapons depicted in sci-fi shows but they still utilise superheated blobs of gaseous plasma being ejected from a weapon barrel....

EMP proof circuits do exist but there not cost or weight effective to produce due to in use manufacturing techniques however a few small improvments ot 3d printing systems could easily overcome that obstical,

the only futurism aspect would be the safe portable nuclear reactor to power the multi terawatt power requirements of such a ship, I mean its not as if they could you know retrofit a submarine as a space ship .... although to be fair that would probably be the best option, its already pressure sealed and designed to operate without venting atmosphere, so utilitarianism should work well as an armed space going vehicle, just have to swap torpedos for rockets and its all good

just as with anything though it will all require international collaborative works and effort to get things sorted and in use in the next couple of years, so not impossible to achieve just improbable that it will happen, unless of course someone sees just how rich they can get off it ...

My post from the Wrongthink Thread:

There are a lot of problems with going to Venus that just aren't practical compared to Mars. For starters, the technology exists, or will imminently exist that will be able to support human habitation in the long term. We could easily have had a permanent moon base for example if public will existed. The issues you'd get with Martian exploration are not as significant as Lunar exploration or habitation (sans travel time), and the conditions are more extreme. Also, travel time to Mars is not all that significant - 150 to 300 days in comparison to about 100 - 160 days for Venusian travel. It's a long term voyage, but there is technology that is in place to negate many of the risk factors for this inside the spacecraft.



Despite what the guy says about Venus's issues, they are not teensy or tiny problems. With current and projected technology, they are impossible to overcome.