kunok

We are derailing the thread, but both of this are even worse in the refinement process than the original ore, with more dangerous materials, worse security problems, and IIRC correctly would need more stages of refinement (not sure about the wording in english). Mining is the cheap part in terms of money. I don't know USA regulations, but there are other countries that aren't USA, without almost any regulations that aren't making new nuclear plants everywhere. Nuclear energy is expensive, very very expensive. It never was the clean and cheap energy as expected. And com'on don't compare nuclear power with coal, that's a false dichotomy, is not the only alternative.

They are doing it because a big cost reduction, for the same 10.000 liters bottle, helium cost 1450 $ and nitrogen cost 22 $. It looks like they will "only" use it in tests https://copenhagensuborbitals.com/helium-versus-nitrogen/

@wumpus fission tech hasn't been ignored nor regulated to death, it just that is very expensive, research is very expensive, resource extraction is problematic and contaminating, refinement of the nuclear fuel is very expensive, safeguarding it and transporting is very expensive, dealing with residues is very expensive... The only real pro of nuclear energy (currently in fission and probably in fusion) is energy density, that's only good for transport not for fixed installations. I would expect to be a good idea for boats and spacecraft, and maybe even aircraft if is cheap, safe and light enough, but I won't expect it to never be cheap enough.

Enjoy the films, games and books and stop trying to make sense of Star Wars physics. You can't really assume anything, unless is some kind of SW cannon physics handbook (I would buy one), because we don't know how far are the physics different in that universe from the real one.

Seriously guys have you ever traveled to gilly in the game? Is easier to land like you were docking in a space station that the regular burn retrograde thing. Ceres is also a very low g place. @peadar1987 IIRC in the expanse verse there is lots of health problem with 0g, that's serious science. The part that isn't realistic at all, is spinning a rock to the level of having 0,3g centrifugal artificial gravity without breaking the rock.

The big interest of the industry in fusion reactor is that they will have the big installations in their power, whereas the solar installations can perfectly been distributed between the consumers, being able to be self-producers of the energy. What is interesting for space enthusiast like us, is that a propulsion fusion device doesn't need at all to contend the energy or to keep the reaction going, only to be able to focus it, you can think of it more like a engine with an energy amplifier than a proper generator.

I use a simple trick, I don't consider almost any of it sci-fy, just futuristic fantasy. Then you just don't care, and enjoy the film

Thanks, I will try that. But I don't really need it, it was just a coherence thing (and that I would like to have an array based antenna). If the others antenna experiments are able to be used as an antenna, this should also be used as an antenna, more even when the description talks about that is an L band antenna.

I don't think SpaceX (or any other of Musk companies) will be beneficed by any of the Trump Government big decisions. But entering in that would be entering in politics. I don't know how to talk about a politics controlled program without talking about politics

I'm NOT a biologist Well, for a start we only have data about plant growing in 1g, and a little of 0g. IIRC one of the biggest problems is that the plants are in a can atmosphere, the don't have a nearly infinite atmosphere to emit ethylene, so you need to filter it (that's an hormone to mature food, is the one used to control maturation in stored food, the tech is said to be developed researching plant growing in the MIR) Other problem was doing a good subtract for the roots, but that's only a problem with 0g IIRC. I'm sorry I don't remember the article where I have read all of this. You can put the botany laboratory to do a series of experiments each of them takes some time. Can be something like this (is close to what happened in real world), but with better english: -Plants have matured before complete grow, dying before they had seeds, we need to research what is happening. -An abnormal grow in the ethylene levels inside the atmosphere, produce plants to mature too early. This ethylene is produced by the plants itself. We need to look for a way to control the ethylene levels. -After adding an ethylene filter, plants grow much better, some of them produced seeds. We would take some of the seeds for further study, and the rest we would use to plant the next gen of plants. I would like to research a little myself, If I have time this weekend, I will post something

I laughed so hard to this, good chapter. One recommendation, better to not put stranded things that maybe need in future in wheels, just retract them. I'm remembering some update and my old aircraft nothing really important but this scene remembered me. Specially all those almost crash

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/11/if-newly-created-metallic-hydrogen.html We still don't know if is metastable but how good it would be to have. Example rocket figures (the figures itself are in english) http://danielmarin.naukas.com/2016/11/08/cohetes-de-hidrogeno-metalico/#comment-406615

The moisture sensor is basically an array of L-band antennas, why not give it antenna capabilities?

No, but this is a science subforum. If Musk comes with a total unreal plan we (well, some of us) will critic it, I don't care how cool it looks the render he presented in that conference if the engineering below is still dubious. He showed a big carbon fiber tank to make a point, but then in the reddit AMA he admitted that they still don't know how they will insulate the interior of the tank, it was only a production test (testing the manufacturing machine, looked very good by the way) , so there isn't a basic figure of tank mass to do the numbers. Then he is also claiming that the biggest rocket ever with a big lifting body as upper stage will cost less than a serial production airplane. As you should understand I don't believe this estimation. But outside the hypothetical big cool cheapest per kg ever rocket what's the plan? What about any other aspects of the ITS like the life support systems? On the other hand NASA and other organizations are doing "boring" plans, but realistic with develops step by step, this would get us eventually to mars, probably first a flag mission, then a science camp, and then more and more, step by step but no claiming that you will start colonization in 10 years. Space agencies at most are making initial designs of science camps, not anything similar to a settlement, nothing permanent, nothing really comfortable or habitable. Give them time and resources, and they would do it but if we give them bad PR because SpaceX is cooler and have fancier plans we are putting stones in their way (not sure if this is a correct form in english). That's the part that bothers me, the total unrealistic plans are giving bad reputation to the ones that are working in real ones, with means less support from common people what in the ends would be less money in the step by step effort The transport cost isn't really the biggest cost here, is all the developing effort, the space goods are already a lot more expensive than the space transport, don't forget that, is a common error here. The only "habitable" place that our stuff will work without mayor modifications is in the clouds of venus, you only need to deal with no oxygen atmosphere, and 4 days long days, and obviously forgetting about the surface (in mars too, you would live in the underground not in the surface, unless you want a collection of cancers), but you have: earthlike pressure and temp, radiation projection, very similar gravity, even more sun energy, all of that is already there. But there is little public interest in Venus, almost nobody knows that there is an habitable zone in the atmosphere at heights of 50-55km and most of the people that knows that think that living in a blimp is weird. What's a strider anyway? Not only less dense bones, we are talking here also about abnormal growth of almost anything. But I'm a engineer not a medic, so here I don't really know, I just read things, and what I'm sure is that there is basically 0 data. We know that 0g is pretty bad. 0,38g? Who knows? One example like any other: What about if the muscles grown faster than the bones? or viceversa?

I went almost crazy researching about the Rd-0410, though not knowing russian was a huge handicap, because there is little technical documentation about soviet engines in english or spanish (or maybe that i'm pretty bad searching)

That's the problem, no. The rocket is the easiest part, by orders of magnitude. Reality is not the KSP. It would need to be redesigned almost every good to work in mars environment, nobody makes vacuum proof goods. As an example I already used, we don't have vacuum and dust proof lubricant that will be need in mars, and that's something very basic, extrapolate to everything outside the habitats, and everything inside that works someway with gravity. I will cite myself about the mars life suport systems Nobody is really developing any mars equipment, outside some sketchs, technical reports or powerpoints. And then there is the part that we don't know if human body can live without long term issues in only 0,38g, and if a baby or a kid can grow healthy? if anything of this is a no, there won't be a human colony (until some medicine advances or maybe never) The problem of the SLS and it's huge prices is that there isn't market for it. Why it would be better for the ITS? And don't tell me the price because the price comes from using it lots and lots of times, the same problem than the SLS

You made all that research and translated all of this??? I need to read this, is going directly to my favorites.

That statement just means that the same camp module in the arctic needs more insulator than in mars, so what? Still magnitude orders easier than putting the same module in mars. It doesn't prove anything. You can have a physics background but an engineering one?. Radiation loses are probably not the biggest ones but they aren't a 1% for sure, you learn that in a engineering degree doing the maths. And that's not the real problem with radiation, one tip: radiation might be less relevant in the losses but is very relevant in the thermal gains from the sun light, and you need to insulate also the excess heat gained. Or drop it outside and now that insulation is a problem. PD: And that's not considering that a mars module need to be a pressure vessel and the arctic one no.

When I said that we currently don't have is as the humanity itself. NASA doesn't have so there isn't tech transference here. Do seriously I need to tell you the difference between a drawing, a sketch, a powerpoint and a real design? There is no real design. I'm the first loving to get paid to work in a real design, but there isn't a program for that. Even having a design, then you need to be able to manufacture (that something so many times forgotten, not only in space industry). There is also nothing of that Because they didn't get settled fast enough to survive the winter? They didn't arrive when there where good conditions? They were prepared enough? Mars is already worse than the worst earth winter from the first second. That equipment doesn't exist outside a powerpoint or a viability report, that's the full point you are missing. And nobody is developing it. The ISS is equipment develop by lots and lots of years. The first modules were a "MIR2" that taken the develops and from the MIR that is also based in the develops of previous soviet stations, the USA modules comes from the skylab and the experiments done with the shuttle. Most of this equipment won't work in gravity and would need a serious redesign. That's decades of research and design. And yet they need regular supplies, and lots of spare parts, lots of regular repairs, not selfsufficent at all. For a more than 400ton space station that is only being able to hold 6 humans. You are probably the most rude and disrespectful person in this section of the forums, at least to me... C'mon I may sound rude sometimes but is because the language barrier, I don't really know how rude I sound. The problem is that you also need to count the developing cost, the building cost (not only the ITS also a very big launchapad and related facilities), and then the fixed costs, that is the hugest part of the equation. This initial cost is distributed between all the elements made. Doing only one ITS? It would be very very expensive. To get that prices it would need lots and lots of clients, yet nobody asked for such big rocket. SLS doesn't have cargo to make it fly regularly that would drop it's costs. There are better ways of preventing kesler sindrome, like deorbiting or putting in graveyard orbits useless things like spend upper stages or old satellites, and the most important one, not launching missiles to satellites for absurd military demonstration.

There isn't designed even the "first camp", even the most basic settlement to be when they arrive, there isn't designed anything. Is not realistic as a comparable scenario. And that's the problem, you keep comparing with an already habitable scenario. You are not the only with emigrant ancestor (I have too, only that he return) , yet AFAIK only the north american people has this strange cultural obsession with the colonies. Your ancestor has already an habitable air, tolerable climate conditions and food that he could get in America. He could do something to settle after that. But a mars colonist doesn't have that, they would die before they can invent anything, with current tech they would die the same day that the ITS returns to earth (and that's assuming that the ITS has a life support system that we currently don't have and doesn't look at all that spaceX is developing).

0 is pure speculation, I don't think is realistic at all and makes everything else very dubious 1 Our comsats (most of them, there are smart ones) are already the most dumb thing that there is in telecommunications. They are already basically a big analog relay, full of transponders, made by valves (Traveling-Wave Tubes are the amplifiers here) with only basics codification. They are already big, dumb, comsats. Ariane 5 has lots of problems to get a single launch comsat. We don't need at all a 400 ton comsat, what good it would do? A 10tn comsat maybe, a 20 ton maybe, that's covered by the falcon heavy for example. Bigger satellites also implies less satellites, we will have the same communication needs. And we are using less and less the sat communications 2 is absurd 3 no need for that big booster for that. 4 no need for that. who will pay for a moonbase and all the need developing effort?, it has the same problems of mars colony. The space elevator is just silly in a body without an atmosphere. 5 who will pay and develop this? there is not that big telescope in the ground 6 this keep coming and coming again, microchips are very very expensive by mass, but the base material isn't that expensive, and is the only part that beneficts of the space manufacturing. ITS is musk dream, doesn't need an economical plan, after all is his money not ours. If ever gets done and has a little price it would have uses, but don't take that as an economic viability plan. Here comes the rant: Taking scy-fy authors as a reference of engineering systems is plain wrong. They usually look only if the system is physically possible in a simplified model not if its feasible from a engineering point or even is viable at all, or the time and people we would need to get something developed, and that in all that time that development need to be paid.

@Northstar1989 and more people, if you claim that SpaceX is only doing the transport part, even believing the tickets prices (I don't, is pretty ridiculous, cheaper than most aircrafts that are manufactured in series), who will made the mars settlement part? Who will design and produce the habitats? Who will design and produce the machinery? One example, it would be need in almost everything almost-vacuum proof lubricants that are also dust proof, AFAIK there is none of that. And it would be worse if we add to that the requirement that needs to be able to done with mars materials. There isn't mars proof habitats, nor vacuum proof mining equipment, nor really anything that we need to a mars settlement , and nobody is doing that. There is no life support system for a mars settlement, and that's probably the biggest problem. The sector with monies here, the military, AFAIK doesn't have closed life support systems in their nuclear submarines, and they would like to. That's and not the ISS, the closest analogue to an habitat in other planet, and that's still far. The rocket is the easy part. Who will be mars enthusiast billonary that will develop everything else? And, seriously, the American colonization example looks ridiculous outside North America, I understand that is part of your culture, but you should question how realistic it is.

I would, but I don't know how to texture nor coding, I have a mod unfinished because it doesn't have textures, and the model is imported from a CAD program, and I didn't have time to learn proper modeling and texturing. I hope I get time soon (TM)

I'm a manufacturing engineer, and please is subtractive manufacturing if you want to use this kind of expression and nobody uses that, is just plain machining. And we also do tanks by forming metal (not sure of the term in english, not my field) and with composites. There is high quality casting (injection casting for example) and there is low quality 3d printing. They have a huge set of common disadvantages, about metal structure and precision. Hey, I'm trying to simplify things to the average Joe, and this is not in my language, of course you are right, but is not like there isn't that kind of defects in metal additive manufacturing. Give me a good CNC 5axis lathe, milling machine, and cylindrical grinder and I will change the world. But then I will also need a lamination factory to get the metals as you said

I was talking about a somewhat self-sufficient early colony. So not premade materials, only local production. In your scenario you are right