Tommygun

Wouldn't Unity cost a lot?

Something with current or near term technology: Unmanned Soyuz with laser: Conventional missiles in vertical launch tubes, rotary Vulcan cannons and spaced armor plates etc:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/06/us/06cnd-astronaut.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

You would still need to remove the CO2. I know they don't have enough EVA suits for all the crew, but do they have the other "orange" type flight pressure suits or something similar to rescue balls for everyone else? Also isn't dragon 1 designed to return science experiments? They wouldn't want high G's damaging those.

I've always wondered if the lower stage didn't decouple, due to a malfunction, if the motor could break the lower stage away.

Yes, I was just think if they really wanted to be able to launch their own. But they would need to modify an Ariane 5 and that would probably end up being something like a Liberty rocket. I guess it would be cheaper to buy smaller capsules from private companies as NASA is doing.

It doesn't have life support, but maybe they could wear their space suits?

I think the Chinese are going to be pissed off.

Something to keep in mind is that space suits use materials similar to Kevlar like cloth to prevent punctures. The helmets also use tough materials similar to armored glass. You're not going to do anything to them without a good purpose built weapon. With limited mobility I won't be surprised if hand weapons like knives or picks wouldn't work ether. Maybe a powered drill or saw, but would be awkward to do in micro gravity and stiff joints. Maybe the guy that doesn't pass out from exhaustion first wins? Edit: Space Combat: (Part 2) how to jack a spaceship.

Well ESA problem, I think, is that it is made up of several countries and trying to get them all to agree on having manned flight and then on a single design is challenging. Maybe they could make a deal to trade service modules for Orions if they want to launch some on their own. Well, if they can launch something that heavy.

3D printing can have its place in construction, but I don't think this is it. This just adds complexity that's not needed. You will have to lunch all the printing materials up to the Moon when just burying it works. If you want to make an actual building with it then this could be useful, but don't waist it on burying a building you bring with you. I still prefer the simpler idea of using solar furnaces to melt regolith into blocks that you build with and then spray the interior with an airtight seal. You need to ship less material to the Moon with this technique. The machinery is also simpler.

There are also drawings of the same capsule as a three manned version. So maybe future flexibility?

Does anyone know if the APXS instrument was able to get any useful science back?

That's quite crowded up there.

I have an urge to make a wall plaque out of this.

I don't think attaching a country with an orbital or flying aircraft carrier would be necessary. Just wait a few years for them to go bankrupt.

This is usually stated as the main reason for the change. On a side note the forth book "3001" isn't particularly good, I don't consider it bad, but the quality of the series slowly goes down after the second book I personally think and 2061 was just OK. But 3001 is good to read as it does answer most of the questions of what's going on with the Monoliths.

Wow, I didn't know its orbital period was that short. I'm surprised it has anything left to out gas at all.

Well you do have what's called Space weathering from radiation, sputtering from solar wind and cosmic rays. Also micrometeorites and maybe several passes toward the Sun over billions of years. It all takes it toll over a long time frame.

Well the shuttle flew for 30 years and Soyuz for close to 50 and counting. I don't see why they need to change any time soon. It's also pretty modular, so they can upgrade major sections of it without designing a completely new craft.

This is a picture I scanned from this months National Geographic, but it had little information on it. It is described as a NASA space suit simulator. Does anyone know its offical name or have links to more information? Thanks

I wonder, there is something called pykrete; it is a mixture of sawdust and water ice. Pykrete has a Tensile strength of 4.826[MPa] which it higher than ice or concrete. Could some kind of ice and dust do something similar? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pykrete#Durability

Burn it in plasma trash furnaces or recycle it back into food.

Here are the specs: http://www.spaceflight101.com/angara.html I found a size comparison too, it's a lot taller than the A5 that I've seen in other pictures: