Deep Space Gateway

>>8986303
>>8986303
Earth-Moon shuttle with landers and moonbase when?

>>8986303
For real though all of these SLS plans are going to look retarded if SpaceX and Blue Origin are zooming around constantly by then

It's something for SLS to do, at least. If they can turn it into a propellant depot along with others in LEO, then have those depots fueled by reusable rockets and use tugs to take things between LEO and the moon etc, it could make a moonbase or regular trips to the moon a lot more affordable.

But none of that will happen anytime soon as long as their mission plans remain so vague.

>>8987115
Yeah, at least it will give the SLS something to do. It might also open up the possibility of deep space servicing missions on stuff like the JWST and similar.
I just want to watch big rockets fly away,as long as that happens then i'm happy as a pig in mud

>>8986550

kek

>>8986303
It would be logical to keep using the tech from ISS in a new station, and to build on from it

-We have tens of years in real-life testing of modules, life support systems, control and manouver, power generation and so on
-More chances to test new modules like the Bigolow inflateble habitats
-Maybe the hippes will be more open to some kind of nuclear power source when its not 400 km above us, but around the moon instead
-Service missions to moon-based and space-based telescopes
-More testing of radiaton shielding
-Earth-Lunar-Moon base/landings
-More cargo/service missions from SpaceX/Orbital/BO, allowing that marked to grow
-As much of a clusterfuck the SLS program has been, at least it and Orion will have something to do
-If anything, it would just piss of moonhoax-retards even more

>>8986303

I am not sure what advantages this gives over leo. Going to mars or the moon can be done with less energy in leo. And i am not sure why they would need to launch on sls when falcon heavy is commercially dupported and 10x cheaper.

>>8989639
>It would be logical to keep using the tech from ISS in a new station
No it wouldn't
Everything from the ISS is old as shit and can be massively improved

>>8986550
>visits to the ISS will look retarded if Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic are doing suborbital hops by then

>>8986303
>>Bush: Let's go back to the moon
>>NASA: gee this is really hard with the amount of funding you've given us
>>Obama: how about we go to asteroids instead? Less DV cost!
>>Trump: let's not
>>NASA Now:Ok, but what if we do the same thing, but without asteroids?

File: elysium.jpg (52KB, 1280x532px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1280x532px

>>8986303
They need to make one with various layers of centrifugal, artificial gravity in order to test the long term biological effects on earth based life-forms.

pic related is a little on the large side, but the dual rings would serve a purpose of having seperate habitat moduals at a different radius from the hub, and thus different "Gravity" levels from the same spin rate.

1g being on the outermost track, then a ring for martian gravity, then one for lunar gravity.

Just sayin.

>>8990159
of course, that would be "a bit" more expensive than a cylinder with no artificial gravity.

>cislunar

Triggered

>>8990159
You see, the problem is, that we have data on the effects of earth level gravity on humans.

And we have the data from the effects of zero-g on humans.

But nothing on lunar or martian gravity.

What would happen to the skeleton? the muscles? the circulatory system? endocrine processes? the circadian rhythm?

reproductive effects? gestational?

This is shit we need to know before we start up a colonization and transforming program for other worlds.

Also, centrifugal artificial gravity would work for keeping humans "Healthy", as opposed to having them atrophy to death in micro-gravity over extended periods of time.

>>8990159
Why the fuck do we need to test this?
>>8990172
It's already been determined that much of the health effects of low gravity can be replicated by having people stay in bed all the time.

The proposed experiment lacks academic merit. Funding denied.

File: one of many designs.jpg (51KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 800x600px

>>8990178
>Why the fuck do we need to test this?

a modified stanford torus would be sufficient.

I've seen designs for a small modular one that I think NASA was kicking around.

something like pic related, with modular sections that could be assembled in orbit... something smaller would probably suffice though.

>It's already been determined that much of the health effects of low gravity can be replicated by having people stay in bed all the time.

you're going to need a bit more scientific rigor for this one...

I am talking about the effects of low gravity on reproduction, and gestation. Biological problems and whatnot.

>>8990133
That's a dumb comparison.

There are two companies that *MIGHT* have platforms that are objectively more advanced, higher payload and much cheaper than the SLS

Especially because the only SLS that will exist until Half LIfe 3's launch day is the 70 ton variant

>>8989820
Yeah i should have been clearer, I didnt mean that one should tow ISS modules out there. But stuff like life-support systems that has been tested and adapted during the ISS program could be an "of the shelf"-solution for a new station, along with other things tried and testet.