Jump to content

kunok

Members
  • Posts

    466
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kunok

  1. I myself I'm trying to be somewhat constructive, even thinking that he is extremely underestimating the difficulty of this project. @alpha tech if you need manufacturing advices just ask, because you don't seem to know what do you really need to manufacture a rocket. For a start, what machine tools have you in your shop? Have you any foundry equipment? Probably buying high grade aluminum will be cheaper that buying all the related equipment and making all the experiments in doing that alloys from soda cans and other elements, especially taking into account the electricity costs. The bigger material problem probably will be getting high temp alloys, not high grade aluminum Developing materials is hard, don't add another level difficulty to something that is already very difficult as a rocket design and manufacturing.
  2. @Northstar1989 What background you have in engineering? You claim yourself to be a biologist, not an engineer. And in real design (in contraposition to just have lectured yourself in engineering)? In real design you try to get some given specifications (including margins), not any more, not any less, using the less time and resources possible. And that's usually not the best possible design. If you go for a better than needed design you get usually an increase in times and costs, usually exponential, that will have little or no benefit. And seriously the central fuselage of the P-38 and an undefined rocket will have different aerodynamic properties and thus their aerodynamic effects in a merged tail. Or maybe is just that two tails just works fine and are easier/cheaper.
  3. Remember that the sun has 99,8% of the mass but less than 1% (I think is a lot smaller but don't recall the number) of the angular momentum of the solar system.
  4. Well Gaia data have 400 scientist and software engineers dedicated to developing a processing software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Processing_and_Analysis_Consortium I suppose that nobody is paying a so big team for the WISE data looking for brown dwarfs and the planet nine
  5. I pointed you to a thread with a real amateur rocket engine builder. Look at all the work done, and look at what stage it is. And basically all the "engineering" assumptions you did in the OP are wrong.
  6. Only to say another wrong point Steel is not a heat resistant material. It gets very soft with the temp. And look to a real amateur rocket engine builder that we have in ours forums @ap0r are you able to understand everything in his thread?
  7. That's the point, a proper software have already ruled out as false negatives lots of objects that are being searched. Of course amateurs will do a lot of false positives, but it's a good enough filter. Remember that the first price is a single unique opportunity exoplanets are lots of them, planet nine is only one
  8. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/nasa-funded-website-lets-public-search-for-new-nearby-worlds In a similar way to kepler data was given in planet hunters, this initiative (also in zooniverse) gives WISE images and ask amateurs to search for the planet nine, and also look for close brown dwarfs. https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/marckuchner/backyard-worlds-planet-9 @ProtoJeb21 I know you like this things
  9. https://blog.planethunters.org/2015/01/08/a-recipe-for-making-a-k2-light-curve/ Is just that you need a higher level of confidence with the data, because this data can have double the noise and could have processing derived glitches PD: sorry for my bad English I'm very sleepy currently.
  10. I really think that it's the bigger hole in the game.
  11. I have a powerpoint explaining that, but I think I'm not allowed to distribute it, I will try to get an open source, but not today, here is midnight. If I forget, remember it to me.
  12. Take into account that kepler K2 data isn't as good or stable than original kepler data.
  13. The crazyness is high in that concept. I didn't know that one. I LIKE IT. But is so far from our technological level that we only could speculate, and I don't think it wont even be an educated guess
  14. I'm Spanish myself, I have read the pages in Spanish, is a permanent inhabited outpost but the inhabitants are temporal, the wikipedia in english is a lot worse than in Spanish for both places. Read here https://translate.google.es/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fes.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FBase_Esperanza&edit-text=&act=url "Together with the Chilean Villa Las Estrellas are the only establishments in Antarctica where there are temporary staff performing military, scientific or service functions accompanied by their families " The wiki in english is wrongly translated [snip] What is a colony for you, define you what is a colony. We did and you put objections in everything without saying what is a colony for you.
  15. Both are bases because the respective governments wants to have rights in the territories. Still both are temporary outposts for the inhabitants, they allow them to be with their families with is nice, but is not a permanent living place, so they are not colonies. How many of that buildings are done from local materials? They are made from supplies from outside, all looks like prebuilt modules, all needed in that station come from outside. A research station has nothing to do with a colony, it doesn't have any line. a research station won't have capability of manufacturing new modules. A colony will need one. In a research station we could of course investigate how to make new modules, in a scaled down versions done with little technology demonstrators, but real humans begins need the real scale version, with a real scale infrastructure. Why you keep thinking that to investigate the colony related techs we need to do a colony? We don't even need really the human to be there to investigate most of the needed tech and systems. A colony is mostly independent, a research stations is not at all, in mars there is a huge gap between both, a lot bigger than in earth, not an arbitrary little line that you keep saying. In real world we have limited resources. Are we speculating in a unlimited resources for space related programs?
  16. That isru is for consumables, is simple and overall makes the required total mass from earth smaller. A colony will need to be able to make new installations. The building and manufacturing installations for that will be bigger, more expensive and the results worse than just sending another research station Seriously you are oversimplifing everything. McMurdo is another different thing that the A-S station, but is still only a station, and it only have 250 people in winter. They are heavily dependent of supplies. And you are the only reference I can search that station had kids and schools. You are the one saying the absurd that is a line between that things, researching is of course legitimate, we are not close to the tech needed for a colony, and is just that who will pay development of an mars siderurgy operation when we don't have idea of how surviving in mars? We could do a big base totally dependent from earth without the needed tech sending an absurd amount of materials but what we get for that? It will be done more research and would be more valuable in the long term a series of research stations. We don't need a colony to research colony related techs. And that research may eventually get us to be able to do a colony. It won't, is just that that ROI will be bigger in another space project that a colony without purpose. Example, for the cost of a mars colony we could have a series of research bases in mars, venus, ceres and ganimedes. Why we should invest in a Mars colony instead of everything else?
  17. This part won't be done in a research station, a research station won't look to be self sustainable. And I think you are the one loosing view of how big is all the infrastructure to be close to self-sustaining (no offense intended, english is not my native language and I usually look more rude than I want). Is not bad learning is just that it won't be funded, because it would require lots of money with no gain, also we don't have the tech to do a colony anyway. Google's campus are parts of their cities not an outpost in a barren world, and they are in an habitable land. Antartica base is an outpost in a barren land, and yes if they grow to be selfsustainable it would be a village, but they are not even close to that, you are the one oversimplifying. Mars is just worse In the long term it may be some sort of the colony, but after lots of research, lots of generations research stations. Maybe the 30th generation of research stations ends being a real colony, when is cheap and reliable to live in mars. Or it could be that Mars is not habitable in the long term, don't forget that.
  18. The "lets find out" phase goes before the colonization phase, and will start with mice reproduction experiments, not with humans. But then is not a colony. A permanent Mars base without kids and without old people is just a research base or even if its ever done a mining outpost. Like here the Antarctica research station or an oil rig, they are not villages.
  19. A colony needs for example (in order per age) neonatals units, pediatrics, kindergarden, schools, institutes, and nursing homes. Nothing of that is need in a permanent habited research station. For a permanent mars colony you need an underground facility, but for a research outpost the radiation maybe be low enough to survive a couple of years in a surface module with a light radiation shield. And don't forget that we don't know if mars gravity is good enough to keep healthy a human in the long term, and we even know less if a human can be born and raised in that gravity
  20. I keep forgetting that cheap in english is not only a monetary term but also a quality related term. In Spanish also has that connotation but a lot less.
  21. Something like: this doses/distance kills everything, lets try a little far away, umm here looks like a 0,1% of them survives a couple of days, what if we make that sample to grow and reproduce and redo the process? I'm curious as well, is this somewhat doable? We could grow a radiation resistant cianobacteries or whatever in the same way we are doing antibiotics resistant bacterias?
  22. That's why I was saying cheap but reliable enough. We are saying exactly the same, forgive my bad Sundays english. A tip, we non-USA persons don't have any reason to know what a wall mart mentality is
  23. Use this https://sites.google.com/site/astropipp/ Functions: Load a sequence of images from supported video files, SER video files or TIFF/BMP/FITS/JPEG/RAW camera image files. Calibrate frames with dark, flat and dark flat calibration frames. Debayer raw frames from colour cameras to produce colour frames. Check each frame contains a planet that is completely on the image and discard any frames that do not. Check for and discard overexposed frames. Centre the planet in the frames. Offset the centred planet. Crop each frame around the centred planet. Apply a fixed gain to each frame. Apply a fixed gamma correct to each frame. Apply a median noise filter to each frame. Stretch histogram for each frame (equalising R, G and B channels for colour images). Estimate the quality of each frame and reorder the processed frames in order of quality. Keep only the number of best quality frames specified by the user. Split colour frames into R, G and B frames. Save processed frames as a sequence of TIFF/BMP/FITS image files, as a single AVI/SER video file ready for stacking or archiving or as an animated GIF for sharing online.
  24. I was only saying that SpaceX is not in the market of the Ariane 5 or the Delta IV. Very expensive launchers but with a 100% success rate.
  25. Or because you did an oversized factory of 400 engines/year and you need to amortize it, and for that you need all the launches you can get. Maybe is that, maybe is other thing, not my problem anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...