I don't care if it's gonna be 2025 or 2035 - the important part is colonizing Mars before it's too late and we desperately need people like Musk to get the ball rolling. Remember that scene in SG1 where space MacGyver's like "I can save these people!! ...Help me!" and Teal'c is like "Many have said that." *turns around and shoots Jaffa* "But you are the first I believe could do it!"? That's exactly how I feel about Musk.
>>52700715 If I had to decide who's to die and who's gonna live, and I had to be absolutely honest, Musk would survive any scenario that doesn't leave me or my parents/siblings dead. Most people don't seem to 'get' him and his ideas (his weirdness during interviews certainly doesn't help) - but I do, and I'll be damned if he isn't one of the most important people that ever lived.
>>52700877 >>52700891 AFAIK the plan is to find a bunch of volunteers who'd go to Mars w/o return ticket (we'll send supplies and a return-ship eventually). Or at least that's one possibility. And it's not like we didn't already land a huge-ass robot there using a goddamn rocket-crane so I'd say sending a bunch of mice would be a step back. Also, we know the atmosphere and radiation levels, so it's a calculated risk, albeit a pretty high one...
>No animals were sent to the moon Because the transfer was simple and easy to correct. The astronauts could do it by hand provided they were given constant guidance. With the Mars transfer being so precise, one small thrust or telemetry fault, or one small bug in the flight control software, can have you millions of miles off course. At that point, due to the deviation amplification spiral (i.e. the aforementioned problem isn't just going to go away), the humans may never be able to return to Earth.
Think about the fact that not every Mars orbiter makes it there. That's due to tiny little maneuver errors.
>>52700692 >the important part is colonizing Mars before it's too late
Implementing some sort of population growth control on Earth seems like it should be a priority in this day and age but no one even talks about that shit. I'm not advocating for mass exterminations or anything but just limiting people to 1 child per person (so 2 per couple) seems like it would be a great idea that would pay dividends 50+ years down the road.
Western countries birth rates are lowering all the time. Why don't we just exterminate all Muslims and blacks instead? They never do anything useful anyways, and their birth rates are the highest of all ethnicities.
>>52700990 The difference between a one way and round trip isn't enough to leave humans on Mars. A manned mission to Mars will cost almost a trillion dollars. What would it be if they didn't return? Half a trillion?
>>52703462 I'm assuming it's a propellant problem. Too expensive/impossible to haul enough propellant to Mars so whatever rocket they have on the surface can produce enough delta-v to launch from Mars.
>>52703549 >impossible to haul enough propellant to Mars
It's easy to get off the Martian surface, the problem is landing. The thin atmosphere makes slowing down difficult. It's only very recently extensive tests of landing a rocket from orbit have been conducted. The Biglow/SpaceX rockets are potential Martian landers.
Rocket fuel could be made on Mars. All you need is water.
>>52704081 Sounds like a gross simplification of the problem. I know I heard of automatic fuel factories on Mars decades ago to solve the returning home part. Sending enough fuel to Mars is of course not impossible. Just economically unfeasible.
Why do you think it's too expensive to place a fuel into orbit? Just a series of rocket launches would do it with our current heavy lift capability
Tranch three of the Space Launch System will be able to lift 150 metric tons into low Earth orbit. That's just a single launch. Or, it can send 70 metric tons straight from Earth's surface direct to Martian orbit.
>>52704456 >Why do you think it's too expensive to place a fuel into orbit? Just a series of rocket launches would do it with our current heavy lift capability Because it's actually very expensive to launch stuff into space? >Tranch three of the Space Launch System will be able to lift 150 metric tons into low Earth orbit. That's just a single launch. Or, it can send 70 metric tons straight from Earth's surface direct to Martian orbit. Yes that's nice. Almost successfully recreating 60s tech half a century later. A shame the system doesn't exist outside the drawing board. It will be cancelled like every other expensive NASA project nowadays.
>>52704523 >Because it's actually very expensive to launch stuff into space?
Relative to what?
A Delta IV Heavy rocket can place 30 tons of fuel into low Earch orbit for around $375 million.
> Almost successfully recreating 60s tech
The SLS is more advanced, and more capable, than the SaturnV. It's the first explorer class rocket; it can deliver a sizable payload, including people, anywhere in the solar system.
To the casual observer it resembles '60s tech, that's because NASA were producing technology that was decades ahead of its time.
> A shame the system doesn't exist outside the drawing board
Er... no, the SLS Block 1 passed its "Preliminary Design Review" in 2013 and its' "Key Decision Point C " in 2014. All the boosters already exist, they come direct from the Space Shuttle production line.
First launch is just two years away.
> It will be cancelled like every other expensive NASA project nowadays.
>>52704928 >A Delta IV Heavy rocket can place 30 tons of fuel into low Earch orbit for around $375 million. That sounds kind of expensive to me. Then you need to get the shit to Mars. >The SLS is more advanced, and more capable, than the SaturnV. It's the first explorer class rocket; it can deliver a sizable payload, including people, anywhere in the solar system. Block 2 will almost achieve what Saturn V achieved. Its purpose is to haul shit into space and then haul it further away using similar tech. I'll call it more advanced when we have fusion engines.
>First launch is just two years away. That's nice but I believe it when I'll see it.
>Let me guess... you vote Republican? Let me guess. You are retarded.
>>52705225 4chan is a cure for autism, in a way. on 4chan autists relentlessly bully each other to the point where they are completely unable to set foot outside their autism caves and/or end their lives
>>52698782 He's been saying that for years now. And his estimations are usually off, if everything they plan to do works as they want I expect them to send the first people to Mars by the 2031 opposition.
>>52702078 Capitalism won't allow it. It demands continual economic growth which demands continual population growth. If the demand stabilizes profit can't be made. Population growing means demand increases. The west can sustain growth while its population doesn't grow because the demand in developing countries is increasing as is their population. We can only halt population increase if capitalism seizes to be.
>>52705832 >Relative to what? In terms of US GDP it isn't even a pin prick. What economical advantages can you see in sending a bunch of retards to Mars? >You can't change the laws of physics. Slap a modern guidance system on a rocket and achieve the exact same thing as 60s tech is modern rocket technology? OK. We just lifted slightly less into space than a 60s rocket did. >Nuclear pulse drives are 1950s tech. I'm not talking about Project Orion.
>>52705839 Installing a GPS into a 30 year old car doesn't somehow magically make it haul more shit.
>>52705933 However, tweaking and improving the engine can make the car haul more shit. Not significantly more, but definitely more than your fancy new drive that doesn't even exist in prototypes yet will be hauling for a couple of decades. Technology is not just about new stuff, but also about improving old stuff. (By the way, I'm talking more about rockets in general, not the SLS alone)
>>52705987 Europe has the highest population density in the world mate. Africa doesn't come near it. The middle east is actually one of the poorest regions in population. An area bigger than Europe with only less than 400 million people.>>52705997
>>52706277 >You see the thing you're typing on right now? It was first commissioned by NASA to send "retards" to the Moon. ENIAC's purpose was to send people into space? I never knew. >The first microcomputer was required by NASA as a flight control system for the Saturn V, they commissioned IBM to make it happen. There was no commercial demand for such a device. Well a German guy was way ahead of NASA without having to send people into space. >Are you Russian? Are you retarded?
>Rocketdyne's F1 engine is obsolete, newer generations of rocket engine are far superior, in terms of efficiency and performance. It's still the most powerful engine in its class ever developed. I'm still waiting for SLS to reinventing existing tech.
>You mean fusion rockets rather than pulse drives? Nuclear rockets are 1960s tech. Can you link me to this fusion rocket manufactured in the 1960s? I think you should call up the ITER guys because they obviously missed that the tech already exists.
>Upgrading the engine does. After upgrading the engine the car can suddenly carry less cargo. Is it still an upgrade in performance? Is the cargo improved somehow by being transported in a vehicle with an upgraded engine that perform worse than the old engine?
>Well a German guy was way ahead of NASA without having to send people into space.
Are you suggesting the V2's gyroscopic flight control system is sufficent for modern space flight?
>F1... It's still the most powerful engine in its class ever developed
You do realize you don't need an F1 to get into low Earth orbit?. There was no need to develop a more powerful rocket motor until there was a committment to return to interplanetary space flight. The new Dynetics F1-B is more powerful, btw.
Out of curiosity, why do you insist on clinging to 50 year old rocket designs?
>Can you link me to this fusion rocket manufactured in the 1960s
They were outlawed under the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
> I think you should call up the ITER guys because they obviously missed that the tech already exists.
Do you know what a hydrogen bomb is? It's a fusion bomb.
>after upgrading the engine the car can suddenly carry less cargo
>>52706826 >You think ENIAC was a microcomuter? I don't know what a microcomuter is.
>Are you suggesting the V2's gyroscopic flight control system is sufficent for modern space flight? I'm suggesting you are fucking stupid and don't know the history of modern computing.
>You do realize you don't need an F1 to get into low Earth orbit?. There was no need to develop a more powerful rocket motor until there was a committment to return to interplanetary space flight. The new Dynetics F1-B is more powerful, btw. F1 remains the most powerful engine ever developed. I can draw a dick on paper and claim the rocket dick is twice as powerful as the F1 rocket. That doesn't mean the rocket dick actually exists.
And you do realize you need as much delta-v as possible to haul idiots like you to Mars? Kind of what Saturn V can do. >Out of curiosity, why do you insist on clinging to 50 year old rocket designs? Because it's the most powerful engine ever developed apparently still outperforming all competition. Why do you opt for mediocre solutions?
>Do you know what a hydrogen bomb is? It's a fusion bomb. Wooosh. Do you know that you have no fucking clue about what you are talking about?
>Wut? It's what your shill launch system will achieve.
>>52707438 >You're using one right now. I'm certainly not using a micro comuter. I do use a digital computer. Which a German guy kind of invented way before NASA. >I have an Msc in Computer Science. So does that include computer history? I guess not since you still don't get it. Oh and since we are flaunting around title I have a ph.d in engineering physics. I guess that makes me an expert on rockets then. >It's an old design which has been surpassed by the new Dynetics rocket motor design. Rocket technology has moved on over the past 50 years... And yet Saturn V outperforms it. The topic in this thread is getting to fucking Mars. Not some fucking getting shit to LEO. >Er.. competition? No one has initiated an interplanetary space program. There is no "competition". The Apollo program ended, that's why the Saturn V was retired, OK so you admit the best rocket to get to Mars is still Saturn V. Good we agree.
>What do you think a hydrogen bomb is? Why are you so fucking retarded? My point is obviously going so far above your head I've just achieved LEO.
shouldn't we be asking what the fuck are we doing to be doing on mars?
we can do work all fucking day right here on earth.
mars us a relic, a dead planet, time would be better spent exploring the oceans of earth and the uncharted lands covered in ice or dense forests.
space exploration on a big ass space station, now that's a better plan than trying to figure out how to live on mars. our current space station is small as fuck and old, we need to improve on that end first before a suicide mission to mars.
>>52708344 >You are indeed using a microcomputer >As opposed to..? You are a bit slow so see >>52708438 >Yes, it's in the introduction to computer science. Well it appears you were asleep since you haven't heard about Konrad Zuse. >Says the person who didn't know what a H-bomb was... You still don't get it? I never ever talked about a fucking fusion bomb in the first place. But then you are a code monkey so I don't expect much from you in the first place. >Er... no. The SLS will surpass the Saturn V. My penis rocket already surpasses everything. >There are no Saturn Vs in development. Obviously not because stupid people demagnetized the schematics. They probably had a Msc in computer bullshit so they didn't understand the significance of what they were doing. Still doesn't detract there is no comparable rocket out there that beats its specs. >I suggest you take a course in basic physics. I suggest you stop being retarded.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.