Apart from all the commercial spin offs.
Sitting our entire civilisation on a single planet or even solar system is putting all our eggs in one basket. I for one don't want to be a 65 million year old fossil with the cockroaches trying to figure out what petty intrigues left us planet bound when we have the technology to spread to other planets.
As a feat in itself not many people can claim to have orbited another object in space or walked on its surface. Far cooler and useful then yearly sports comps.
Essentially review how much money and resources is thrown at movies and sports before claiming space travel is a waste. For instance a single movie costs more then sending a robot to mars.
Talk split into a new thread.
Last edited by Beskar; 05-22-2013 at 00:13.
The problem is a successful vehicle to travel across space to another planet, would be very much like the planet we live on. The time and distance basically requires a perpetual motion machine; that never ends well.
Ja-mata TosaInu
Please - we are nowhere near getting off this planet - we can't even sustain a small Bio-Dome, let alone terraform Mars, we can't produce effective radiation shields (that we can power) to protect the colony, and we can't launch large payloads into space.
The failure of the shuttle program has demonstrated just how far we would need to go, and that's before we ever even talk about getting out the Solar System. Unless something changes in our fundamental understanding of Physics we've basically established that FTL is impossible.
That's why we haven't been visited by Aliens, they can't get off their own planets.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
"Failure of the shuttle program"?
The number of inventions resulting directly or indirectly from the shuttle program is to numerous to count. It was the defining project of the technology which created the age we live in now.
It was a complete success.
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
The space shuttle program generated a lot of technology as did the Apollo program before it.
The physics hasn't changed. But we've had the technology to go to Mars for quite some time.
A lot of the reasons we havn't come down to petty intrigues such as special interest group lobbying and pork barreling.
The cost of fuel to get a vehicle into orbit represents only a fraction of the total cost. Most of it is in manufacturing according to old methods in particular political hot zones. A lot of the space age tech and manufacturing is still stuck in the sixties.
Whilst NASA could be more efficient if it wasn't used as a pork barrel resource. It could obviously do more with more money. It's budget is about 5% of what is spent on sports. For instance the top ten sportsmen could privately pay to go to space out of their earnings... In short we pay more to adverts of Just Do It rather then going to space by a factor of twenty.
So Mad Men marketing spin for the win.
The purpose of the Shuttle Program was to create a viable re-usable space vehicle, but the program never got out of the testing phase - two shuttles exploded in flight and killed their crews, and it was demonstrated that disposable vehicles were more economical.
Failure.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Never know until you test.
Speaking of marketing spin:
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home..._spinoffs.html
vast amounts of the "modern" life style (Mobile Phones, Personal Computers, GPS, scratch resistant glass, Memory Foam, Shoe Insoles, Cordless Tools, Water Filters, LED's and many many more) were either a direct result of the space program or were derivatives of technology that was
this alone means the space program was worth it
as for the Shuttle program - 135 missions were carried out with 2 accidents - they got their moneys worth
Bookmarks