They have been discussing this type of propulsion for decades, and I don't believe it has ever gone beyond just that. Talk. If possible, it would still take 42 years to reach Proxima Centauri, which is not expected to have any habitable planets, and another 42 years to get back, or many more to get to the next star system. Unfortunately the star systems are not conveniently lined up for us to explore. Any mission of this type would have to keep a crew and in turn their offspring alive for a century or more. A ship to maintain a crew for this long would have to be enormous. I'm not saying it isn't possilble, only that we could go a millenium or more before discovering a planet like Earth, and as I pointed out earlier, it is not just finding the right planet, but the right planet at the right time in it's own history, a history that like ours, probably stretches billions of years. Not saying you are suggesting this irlandais, but I get the sense from some people that they think space exploration is going to save us from ourselves, and that we will simply find a new planet to conquer and use up. That is after all the overwhelming legacy of exploration on our own planet.irlandais9000 said:
Is Manned Space Flight Worth It?
- Thread starter Asterix
- Start date
So? "Rome wasn't built in a day". Think baby steps. Going to the moon was the first baby step. Going to Mars will likely be the second baby step. Will Jupitor be the 3rd? We'll never learn to walk without first learning to take baby steps. And who can tell what will be learned or discovered over the next century or the one after that?Asterix said:
Perhaps it will be 3 centuries before a crewed-Terran ship leaves our starsystem for another. We gotta start sometime, unless we're prepared to write it off entirely.
But all the discusions are pretty pointless. If there's money to be made, business will fund space development, if not from lobbying for government funds then by directly funding it them selves. And if someone is going to fund it, they will always be able to find thrill-junkies wanting to take a ride and maybe get into the history books.
The "so what" is that we will likely face many crisis threatening our existance on Earth before we will ever be able to move ourselves elsewhere. Our main focus should always be preserving this place as if we could never leave. But you bring up a good point. The future of space travel will probably go in the direction of tourist excursions more than anything else.George OTJ said:
Hey, great discussion TERBsters.
My view is that financially manned space flight probably make no sense but financially neither does art. Manned space flight taps into our imaginations, inspires us and requires us to solve tougher problems (like how to keep the people alive) than probes do. I don't think the American public would be nearly as interested in a space program without a manned space component.
At the end of the day it's an extravagance, like art, that we can afford. Now, as for the Chinese.....
OTB
My view is that financially manned space flight probably make no sense but financially neither does art. Manned space flight taps into our imaginations, inspires us and requires us to solve tougher problems (like how to keep the people alive) than probes do. I don't think the American public would be nearly as interested in a space program without a manned space component.
At the end of the day it's an extravagance, like art, that we can afford. Now, as for the Chinese.....
OTB
While I think space based weapons will trump conventional arms in my lifetime and it won't be the EU that makes it happen, no one can really stop a suicide bomber can they?
OTB
OTB
True, but in terms of the relative magnitude of security threats the average suicide bomber ranks only a few degrees above the disgruntled postal worker or organized crime gang. In other words, terrorism is ultimately a social problem (albeit an extremely grave one), not a military threat per se; while you can't nuke suicide bombers from orbit, terrorism is not an instance of the type of problem the securitization of space is intended to address, and should thus be excluded from the concept of "security" for purposes of discussion.onthebottom said:
Which seems to be the main threat these days - making the argument for arming space a waste of time and resouces.Keebler Elf said:
I am in favour of responsible space exloration;
but I think their are better uses for the resouces then develpment/deployment of space weapon systems.
Here's hoping the space shuttle and crew get home safely in the next few days. First, protruding insulation strips between the tiles that they managed to pull out, but were prepared to cut off with a hack saw made with duct tape, and now a thermal blanket that they may have to cut off or shred so that it comes off on reentry. Duct tape and Swiss army knives. I thought this was supposed to be high tech.
comment...
...In my view, the shuttle/space program is a major scientific achievement. This often seems to be overlooked in the media; that the shuttle is an experimental vehicle. I hope that the astronauts return safely to Earth, as well. Sincerely, Jon .
...In my view, the shuttle/space program is a major scientific achievement. This often seems to be overlooked in the media; that the shuttle is an experimental vehicle. I hope that the astronauts return safely to Earth, as well. Sincerely, Jon .
It will be 7 years before the shuttle's replacement becomes operational. The new crew capsule looks like a larger version of the Apollo command module. The launch vehicles will use the shuttle's main engines and solid rocket boosters, and will be used to go to the moon in 2018.ossipago said:
http://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/cev.html
Last edited:
