quote:
Chalesm painfully thought these words up:
Nyet!
Well, his language checks out. We've got our eye on you, Comrade Chalesm.
*puffs his pipe and stares uncomfortably at Chalesm*
quote:
Reynar had this to say about Optimus Prime:
I don't know if you've kept up or not, but the ISS has been up and running for quite some time now, and thus far has done basically nothing for us. It is basically a failure.
Yes, it is. This, oddly enough, is why I want us to support it.
I figure it's only a matter of time before neglect, sub-par parts, and crappy repairs have it about ready to break apart. Then, I want it to be put back together.
Figuring out how to do that, in space, is going to give us valuable lessons in what to do when things go to crap. That's something we need more practice on before we make a moon base.
quote:
Chalesm wrote, obviously thinking too hard:
Well, there was the rather embarassing "Skylab" incident, where America's first space station kind of... crashed into Australia.
.....
Didn't Crash, It de-orbited because the bean counters told NASA that the Lab wasn't worth it and they let it fall. The Station itself was made old parts from a Saturn V.
And again, Moon base would have a much higher Upkeep. The moon is a Giant rock with NOTHING on it, anything you make there has to be shipped from Earth, why fight all that gravity to send it to the moon to fight another gravity, even if it is smaller.
quote:
Pyscho_Pike obviously shouldn't have said:
And again, Moon base would have a much higher Upkeep. The moon is a Giant rock with NOTHING on it, anything you make there has to be shipped from Earth, why fight all that gravity to send it to the moon to fight another gravity, even if it is smaller.
Because of the lesser gravity, naturally. 
Think about it. To lift a 10 ton payload off of Earth, you need enough fuel and extra equipment to lift 10 tons, plus the weight of the extra fuel and equipment.
To lift that same 10 ton payload off of the Moon, you need alot less fuel and equipment. The saved weight can be cut, or replaced with more fuel and toys. For a long trip, to Mars for example, that extra fuel and toys might be the difference between success and failure. So, we lift everything up to the moon, put it together, and lauch it from there.
Is it more expensive? Hell yah. But, it gives us more flexability, and allows us to launch things we just can't launch from Earth. [ 01-10-2004: Message edited by: Palador ChibiDragon ]
quote:
Chalesm had this to say about dark elf butts:
Well, there was the rather embarassing "Skylab" incident, where America's first space station kind of... crashed into Australia.
Oh, everybody knows that was an accident!
We were aiming for Cuba.
quote:
This one time, at Taeldian camp:
Because we all know that we like to neglect our multi-billion dollar international space stations and let them fall down.
skylab ring a bell?
quote:
There was much rejoicing when Pyscho_Pike said this:
And again, Moon base would have a much higher Upkeep. The moon is a Giant rock with NOTHING on it, anything you make there has to be shipped from Earth, why fight all that gravity to send it to the moon to fight another gravity, even if it is smaller.
What's in a rock? Here's a list of the stuff we know is already there:
Oxygen, Silicon, Aluminum, Iron, Calcium, Sodium, Potassium, Magnesium, Titanium, Hydrogen, Phosphorus, Maganese, Carbon, Chlorine, Chromium.
Note these are based on samples taken from a total of 12 landings. (6 US Apollo missions, 7 USSR Luna missions) Source: lunar composition We've physically explored maybe a square mile of the moon, who knows what else is there?
Yep, we'd have to haul a conciderable amount of stuff to the moon to set up shop. But once the basics are there, there's no good reason to keep hauling stuff from Earth that can be made on the moon. Once the manufacturing infrastructure is in place there is all kinds of things you can do with it.
If we strip-mine the moon won't it effect its mass.. and thus its orbit?
The moon doesn't have the same situation, as far as I know. Now, it really depends on where any worthwhile deposits are below the surface. If we dig for a while then hit once again, hard rock and iron deposits, we won't go very far. To affect the moon's weight to the point where its gravity would be affected would be the removal of millions of tons of material. Despite centuries of mining on Earth, our orbit hasn't been affected.
Though it would be freaky to see the moon drift away, or crash into the Earth like in that drawing that Gyd's head inevitably got photoshopped on.
Do share!
quote:
Elvish Crack Piper's unholy Backstreet Boys obsession manifested in:
Heh, is that a movie shot redone or a complete photo-shop?
Or is it neither? Could it be a look...into the future?
quote:
Mortious attempted to be funny by writing:
My last comment was a joke, but now I'm curious.If we strip-mine the moon won't it effect its mass.. and thus its orbit?
Possible I suppose, but it is a pretty good sized chunk of rock. I'd tend to think the amount of resources extracted would be miniscule in relation to what's there. I tend to think the moon would eventually become more of a processing facility once we get a colony established there, a proper space station in orbit around earth, and a mars colony going.
The only thing that would happen is no more tides, and a very, very slight wobble in the earth's orbit right now would go away. Even if we mined the moon until there was only a tiny little pebble left, that pebble would still be in the same orbit. Short of strapping giant rockets on the moon, it's not going anywhere.
In the beginning the Universe was created.Douglas Adams, 1952-2001
quote:
Sarudani Miolnir stopped staring at Deedlit long enough to write:
End of the world
quote:
Chalesm had this to say about Punky Brewster:
Short of strapping giant rockets on the moon, it's not going anywhere.
Good to know!
