Green Baron

Several other risks are added in lunar orbit, like radiation/high energy particles, harder supply chain, more sophisticated procedures ... Nope, the risk is much higher. And the journey doesn't take 6 months, it takes 2-3 years. Just read the link i posted ! A new risk compared to lunar orbit for example is the nutrition, people won't stay healthy from dry food only for three years. And that's one point from a list of several pages. The lunar orbit station, if they do it, is a good demonstrator and test contraption for these things with a chance of getting people home in a matter of days should the need arise.

That one made me lol. Unfortunately the page referenced in the link cannot be found. They say that cubic poop is better suited to mark the territory because it doesn't roll off the branches of trees. I am trying to imagine a scenario where the selective pressure leads to cubic poop production ... :-)

Oh man @kerbiloid, trying to be funny ? This is where i took the points from: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/deep-space-gateway-to-open-opportunities-for-distant-destinations On Nasa's plans to study human exposure to space i found this: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/heomd_001_-_exploration_objectives_baseline_release_090716.pdf Tldr: a lot to be learned, little really known yet. @DAL59, have a look at this, it'll show that your "shooting soldiers" comparison isn't correct. They could get people in a few days home from the moon should they show whatever symptoms, not so from a Mars trip. People coming from LEO after 6 months are in a bad shape, they have to be carried away, bones and muscles atrophied, arteries stiffened, eyesight lowered and with the immune system damaged. Despite 2 hours training/day. And they were top fit before. So there is still a long way to go research wise before somebody gets a ticket to Mars, if its not a one- or even one-half-way ticket.

Hola ! I'm running it on Debian Buster as well in 64 bit, slightly modded. No problems encountered. Oh, i should say i don't use CKAN, the only one who updates anything on my pc am i. Sancho :-)

Germans and sqwirwels never find together. The Bavarian version is impossible to pronounce correctly for somebody not initiated to that "language", meaning all other Germans. It goes like "Oachkatzl" (oak cat), and the tail is an "Oachkatzlschwoaf", a common joke when it comes to Bavarian.

I am not the biggest fan of Nasa, they produce too little outcome for too much money and often shouting out too loud when something was found. Sometimes they even stray from the path of evidence based findings :-) On the other hand, for example the momentarily most successful machine for space exploration in terms of scientific publications, the VLT, is doing its job much less pretentious than the Hubble telescope. But saying that Nasa doesn't make progress isn't really reflecting reality imo. Nasa is a huge apparatus and cannot be reduced to manned missions, in contrary, their space telescopes and probe missions helped and help A LOT with our understanding of what's going on around us. Manned missions apparently do not have a high priority for now. There is a bit of a Mars-hype going on that was refueled lately with Musk's coming out. As soon as it becomes clear that things aren't as easy as advertised the hype will cease again. As long as there are no spaceships capable of carrying anybody beyond Leo all the hype about gateways, Moon and Mars are games of the mind anyway. Edit: oh, i forgot: ... and in the last 10 years Nasa has been extremely helpful in helping start-ups ! A few billions helpful if i get it right.

There is nothing to cancel yet ...

Ok, i actually read the Nasa announcement (August 2017) for the gateway thing - it is an announcement - it could be a cooperation with Roscosmos - it is meant to explore procedures and techniques for long term crewed space missions - it is a demonstrator for the capabilities of SLS and Orion - no fixed orbit (electric propulsion system) - could be a gateway to the moons surface - could test long term crew support (1 year, in 2020 at the end of the 2020s) - could be made into a vehicle traveling to Mars My comments: it still could be the logical next step in manned space exploration but this is all a little too soft for my taste. The timeline for the crew mission is too narrow ambitious given the fact that nothing of that exists. Edit: corrected because i misread !

How do i recognize an alien ?

I can't follow you, i am sorry ... Should it turn out that people get sick after a stay of multiple weeks or months they can come home in a few days from the Moon. Iif a ship is docked and ready like it is the case on the ISS, judging from the pictures. On journey to Mars means 2-3 years out there, no matter what. Hayabusa ?

You are correct if it was about assembling an interplanetary ship, that makes more sense in LEO than around the moon in terms of dV. But the gateway is not (yet) about assembling a Mars ship but besides other things rather about studying the effects of interplanetary space on humans. A station on ground on the Moon would cost more dV to reach than an orbital station, too much for Orion as @tater has pointed out. So the moons surface is out of reach for any studies that involve humans. Besides that it is my personal opinion that there is nothing interesting on the Moon. Edit: i mean scientifically interesting. If you want a station to show presence or so than ok, why not.

Yippeeeh ! :-) Yep, that's the missing data before we can send anybody in the direction of Mars with some peace of conscience.

I see. So exploring the moon is not the main theme of the "gateway" (what a name), rather preparing for longer stays of humans in space. That was the initial point, wasn't it ?

What's the official statement from Nasa as to the purpose of it ? Exploring the moon isn't the main theme i can imagine. There isn't exactly the most on it. A lavatube doesn't demand our full attention i would think ? Moon missions, if necessary, will probably be a different thing and carried out directly from earth. But that is just an unqualified assumption from my side :-) This may be a dumb and uninformed question, but why can Orion only do one specific orbit and in how far is it useless ?

Collecting exactly that data is probably the main reasons for such a station, at least for the early phases.

The idea of a station around the moon sounds like the logical next step to me.

I admire your eagerness :-) I should add that irl a disk of that mass cannot exist, it'll cramp into a sphere and/or the outer parts fly away if it rotates. Or the laws of gravity must be changed for some of the assumptions to work, they partly stay intact for others. I have the following examples: Density of the sphere cannot be the same as that of a disk as the pressure is missing. Iron in the earth's core is compressed to >13g/cm³. Also angular momentum of a disk is different than that of a sphere as more mass is out and away from the center. The mass of a sphere can, for ease of calculation, be regarded as being concentrated in a point, for a disk that doesn't work. Yeah, geo-discodynamics wouldn't work AT ALL, as NONE of the forces that drive them on and inside of earth exist on a disc. Beginning with convection inside, going over coriolis force and not stopping at insolation. None of the observations would be explainable with a disc-concept if we keep the laws of physics like they are. Edit: moment of inertia of a disk is m*r²/4 ? Or did i get something wrong ? I didn't: you took the moment in z-axis, but it should be in x/y-axis as you want to calculate the forces on the rim of the thing. Also, i am not sure if assuming the disk as being represented by a point mass is correct in this context. It's really not ... ?

Nasa's inefficiency is a systemic thing in all of the institutions driven by the public hand. That is not really news. Nevertheless these institutions usually can take a lot more money in hand than most private companies ever could dream of. Subject to slight changes only every legislative period ... period. :-)

You are correct with your view @KSK, i think. Another example for good-will value is Tesla whose shares all in all value more than those of the Ford motor company. Irl Tesla is worth less than nothing. A good-will, that what share holders are willing to pay initially, is nothing but a bet on future expectations. But the initial claim was that SpaceX's yearly budget (the money they can spend) is 75% of Nasa's, which is a slight overestimation ... :-) Also it was said that SpaceX is doing more than Nasa. But Nasa runs several interplanetary projects, research satellites, does r&d in several dependencies and helps startup-companies like SpaceX to get into the boots. For now SpaceX is an aspiring launch provider, about to catch up with the classic ones that are around for several decades.

The Cap San Diego is waiting (1/200, Editor Dom Bumagi), i just took it into the hand ... beautiful ship :-)

Cool ! I have a few models here waiting (ships, 1/200 and 1/250), but if i start now there will be protests.

SpaceX is a private company and so doesn't have to report the numbers. But it shouldn't be impossible to get an idea of what they turn around: + public funding + sold launches - 5000 employees - variable cost(r&d, construction of sites) - fixed cost(rental comes to mind) +/- other(insurances, private deposits if any). If the number at the end is green then it is a small one. Or, if we just look at the income side, then #launches*62milion + funding. If that is 5-10% of Nasa's budget then they were doing good.

Simply let go of the idea that the universe exploded into something. It began very small, but we can not define the initial moment, physics start when it already had a certain size, somewhere at the start of what is called the "inflation". And yes, the expansion doesn't make halt in our proximity or in us, we just don't realize as we have no other reference. Yes, it is simple. The expansion simply adds up with distance. Imagine the distance between 2 points 1m apart gets larger by 1cm in 1 minute. A third point another meter away "flees" with 2cm/minute, and so on. And there is no speed limit to this expansion. The speed limit is "only" for things with mass inside this expanding space, it is a "local" speed limit. Pedestrian area :-) As to the center: the universe is thought of to have probably no "edge", or the other way round, to be infinite. Should become clear if we adopt the idea that it did not explode into something. No edge, no center. Or, with a little philosophy, the "center" is everywhere and so why not right here. Hope that wasn't totally wrong, ready for being corrected.

There was a hearty discussion about this in the Fermi-Paradox thread :-) Need temperature/exhaust velocity and mass of the propellant and vehicle ... i'm not sure if the pilot knows :-) But it is in the toy range: below 2000ft height above ground i think i read.

I especially found this quote .... clarifying: "Meaning that, if you kill your grandfather, you do it with only probability one-half," Wilde said. "Then, he's dead with probability one-half, and you are not born with probability one-half, but the opposite is a fair chance. You could have existed with probability one-half to go back and kill your grandfather." Eh ? So, what's the sentence for one-half-probability murdering ? The Yeti, genetically identified (that took long didn't it ?) as brown bear, black bear or one sample simply from a dog. Anybody disappointed ? :-) http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/284/1868/20171804