What direction should NASA go after SLS?

[crazyewok]

Another thing. Maybe NASA and some of the other allied space agencys like ESA and JAXA should merge more. Really space should a international endevour anyway. Pooling resources and aligning goels would go a long way. The ISS was a great start and the ideals behind it expanded on.

[ProjectXMark1]

If you have a big rocket, you can put huge things into orbit, and then you can go anywhere. Really, if we put our minds to it, we could have Orion driven spacecraft or black hole starships roaming the solar system by the ~2070s *optimism alert*.

The one snag is that an SLS costs a bomb to build, so yeah, in my opinion NASA should work on more efficient spaceflight i.e. stick parachutes on the SLS and land it Falcon-style (as ridiculous as it sounds).

[SargeRho]

Since currently both NASA's and ESA's plan is to land Humans on Mars in the 2030s, they deffinitely should work together on that.

[crazyewok]

Since currently both NASA's and ESA's plan is to land Humans on Mars in the 2030s, they deffinitely should work together on that.

EXACTLY!

Why work seprately when they can work together? Makes no sense.

[Duxwing]

I think that we should think bigger: an orbital station around and a surface station and space elevator upon every planet and moon, with space elevators and gas NERVA greatly cheapening and hastening interplanetary transit. The ultimate goal would be a manned station in or near Jupiter's core.

-Duxwing

[Kryten]

Since currently both NASA's and ESA's plan is to land Humans on Mars in the 2030s...

What're you basing this on?

[crazyewok]

I think that we should think bigger: an orbital station around and a surface station and space elevator upon every planet and moon, with space elevators and gas NERVA greatly cheapening and hastening interplanetary transit. The ultimate goal would be a manned station in or near Jupiter's core.

-Duxwing

You got a spare 100 trillion?

[crazyewok]

What're you basing this on?

What they have said in statements.

See the Aurora programme for the ESA.

Of course what they say is likley very diffrent to reality.

[SargeRho]

What're you basing this on?

ESA's Aurora Exploration Programme has an unmanned and a manned Mars Mission planned for 2031 and 33 respectively.

[Kryten]

ESA's Aurora Exploration Programme has an unmanned and a manned Mars Mission planned for 2031 and 33 respectively.

Yes, the Aurora program from 2005. Here in the year 2014, the only missions from Aurora with any kind of schedule or funding are Exomars 2016 and 2018, and even they required big financial contributions from the Russians.

[crazyewok]

Yes, the Aurora program from 2005. Here in the year 2014, the only missions from Aurora with any kind of schedule or funding are Exomars 2016 and 2018, and even they required big financial contributions from the Russians.

Your missing the huge point as per useal.

If NASA and ESA actually combined and pooled resources it would make it alot more likely rather than a pipe dream.

[Kryten]

NASA and ESA tried to pool resources. NASA realised they didn't have any resources to pool, which is why ESA had to turn to the russians. Same thing happened to JUICE.

[crazyewok]

NASA and ESA tried to pool resources. NASA realised they didn't have any resources to pool, which is why ESA had to turn to the russians. Same thing happened to JUICE.

Which is why both NASA and ESA should try and align there focus more. Better to work together on a few projects and excel than go seperate and try and do a dozen things at once with half of them getting cancelled or failing.

A international space agency would be a huge step in my opinion. In space nationality should be irrelevent.

[Kryten]

Which is why both NASA and ESA should try and align there focus more. Better to work together on a few projects and excel than go seperate and try and do a dozen things at once with half of them getting cancelled or failing.

NASA and ESA have completely different priorities, it wouldn't work. ESA is based around relatively small-budget science and technology missions, and NASA overwhelmingly focuses it's budget on crewed flight boondoggles. ESA doesn't even have any plan for crewed flight at all; one of the things wikipedia fails to make clear is that that the full Aurora document was only ever a proposed plan, and the only part approved by the council of ministers was Exomars.

[crazyewok]

NASA and ESA have completely different priorities, it wouldn't work. ESA is based around relatively small-budget science and technology missions, and NASA overwhelmingly focuses it's budget on crewed flight boondoggles. ESA doesn't even have any plan for crewed flight at all; one of the things wikipedia fails to make clear is that that the full Aurora document was only ever a proposed plan, and the only part approved by the council of ministers was Exomars.

Why the assumption I used Wiki. I get continulay offended by your assumptions. I already noted that what ESA would LIKE to do is diffrent to what they CAN do.

Yes NASA and ESA do have different priorities and maybe they should both have a re evaluation. Id like to see a international space agency. But again thats what id LIKE to see, I know in reality humans are far too divisive and political to do it.

[Kryten]

Why the assumption I used Wiki. I get continulay offended by your assumptions.

The Aurora program is what's mentioned on the wikipedia article for 'manned misison to Mars', and isn't mentioned many other places. Even ESA themselves have taken that part of their website down completely.

[crazyewok]

The Aurora program is what's mentioned on the wikipedia article for 'manned misison to Mars', and isn't mentioned many other places. Even ESA themselves have taken that part of their website down completely.

Excuse me for not keeping up to date with every program over the last decade. I read a lot of journals, and so many things are proposed and then cancelled when it comes to ESA and NASA its hard to keep up, especialy when astrophysics and aerospace engineering is the oppoiste from your own field. .

[Kryten]

Journals like what?

[crazyewok]

Journals like what?

I dont know it was 7 odd years I ago I think I read it, from a trolley in the university of Kent library. I was reading it while passing the time not writing a essay so didn't take down a full reference number. Why does it even matter? It was proposed it was cancelled. I wasnt even the one pegging the ESA as one that was going to happen, as I stated there a diffrence between what they would LIKE to do and what they CAN do.

Edited January 20, 2014 by crazyewok

[CleverClothe]

Talk of colonies, mining, etc... belongs in the science fiction area, not here.

Preposterous, this is the only proper place to discuss such topics. Stop trying to stifle topics that YOU don't like.

We should build a semi-permanent lunar outpost, similar to the research stations in Antarctica.

That is a colony, in the way the word is used around here.

[Skyler4856]

You got a spare 100 trillion?

You under estimate the value of 100 trillion dollars. 1 trillion is 1000 billion dollars. 1 billion is 1000 million. The Apollo program was accomplished with 23.9 billion. For 100 trillion dollars I could fund the Apollo program for 41,840 years assuming every time a landing occurs I start over. Once a space elevator was developed cost would plummet. NERVA could be used to hasten the colonization of mars and the Jovian system.

[crazyewok]

You under estimate the value of 100 trillion dollars. 1 trillion is 1000 billion dollars. 1 billion is 1000 million. The Apollo program was accomplished with 23.9 billion. For 100 trillion dollars I could fund the Apollo program for 41,840 years assuming every time a landing occurs I start over. Once a space elevator was developed cost would plummet. NERVA could be used to hasten the colonization of mars and the Jovian system.

There colonisation and there building MASSIVE super structures like he is sugesting. Plus you wouldnt want to touch the Jovian system, to much radiation, better to go to the saturn system. Anyway if you get to the point of building ships in orbit NERVA is as dated as Chem rockets, if you dont have to worry about fallout then you can as well go full pulse propulsion, that would put even the outer reaches of the solar system at a few months away.

[Nibb31]

That is a colony, in the way the word is used around here.

No it isn't. A colony is a self sufficient settlement with hundreds of people who emigrate permanently, have kids, and die there. It's pure science fiction because it's technically and economically as out of reach as warp drives or teleportation.

A scientific outpost, with maybe a dozen crew members that would stay for 6 months to two year rotations, is not a "colony" by anyone's definition.

[Skyler4856]

There colonisation and there building MASSIVE super structures like he is sugesting. Plus you wouldnt want to touch the Jovian system, to much radiation, better to go to the saturn system. Anyway if you get to the point of building ships in orbit NERVA is as dated as Chem rockets, if you dont have to worry about fallout then you can as well go full pulse propulsion, that would put even the outer reaches of the solar system at a few months away.

100 trillion dollars is still an absurd amount of money. Maybe1-10 trillion dollars.

[crazyewok]

No it isn't. A colony is a self sufficient settlement with hundreds of people who emigrate permanently, have kids, and die there. It's pure science fiction because it's technically and economically as out of reach as warp drives or teleportation.

I wouldnt say technically (If you mean scientifically ) but economically and politicaly on our present path yes. Maybe SKYLON could reduce Earth to orbit prices enough? Though it could end up a white elephant like the shuttle. But useing traditional chemical rockets? Not a chance in hell, EVER.