Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / A Rather Important Day in History

Author
Message
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 04:10 Edited at: 27th Jul 2005 04:11
Link
Today is the first space shuttle launch since the Columbia crashed. Just heard it on the news, it's had liftoff.

My dear ole dad is over there, him and a co-worker got VIP seats from a couple of senators that bugged out.

During his campaign Bush mentioned going to the moon (and possibly even further manned space travel?). Now's the opportunity to really kick space exploration back into gear not just to beat the communists, but to actually explore space.


I'm going to eat you!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Megaton Cat
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Aug 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 04:42
Link
"Beat the communists"...? O_o


Need a team? No noob bullshit, visit http://www.teamrequest.com
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Hawkeye
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2003
Location: SC, USA
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 05:20
Link
Russans! OMG!


meh blog
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Eric T
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Apr 2003
Location: My location is where I am at this time.
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 05:30
Link
I say we make a special exploration mission to Uranus and destroy and Klingons that may be hiding in the region of Uranus...

That joke HAS and WILL live on till we actually reach Uranus.

http://blog.myspace.com/erict An Alternative to Mouse's blog. Now with more lowbrow opinions.** Warning - explicit language**
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Killswitch
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Oct 2002
Location: School damnit!! Let me go!! PLEASE!!!
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 07:38
Link
Bush said he wanted to goto the Moon, and I think he mentioned Mars but the Human race, as it stands, doesn't actually posses a rocket that can actually get there. All of the Saturan 3 (or 5 - I can't remember) rockets from the Apollo missions have been used.

~It's a common mistake to make, the rules of the English langauge do not apply to insanity~
Back to top
Profile PM Email
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 07:41
Link
@killswitch, its not like the shuttles slow down on a long distance i think its mainly keeping food suppplies is the harder part unless astranauts love eatings wheat based stuffs 24/7


Back to top
Profile PM Email
Toby Quan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: U S A
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 08:15
Link
I don't think that today's launch of the space shuttle is more important historically than any other launch of a space shuttle...
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
DBAlex
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Oct 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 08:36 Edited at: 27th Jul 2005 08:36
Link
Quote: "Bush said he wanted to goto the Moon"


I say we leave him there too.

0 PRINT "BUSH ON THE MOON"
10 GOTO 0


AMD 64 3000 + 512mb RAM + 80GB HD + Radeon 9600se 128mb
http://www.dbastudios.cjb.net
Back to top
Profile PM
Megaton Cat
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Aug 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 12:35
Link
Quote: " Russans! OMG!"


Ah those crazy commies. I thought we were finished with em in 89'


Need a team? No noob bullshit, visit http://www.teamrequest.com
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 12:56
Link
Quote: "@killswitch, its not like the shuttles slow down on a long distance i think its mainly keeping food suppplies is the harder part unless astranauts love eatings wheat based stuffs 24/7"


Especially as the trip will take around 10 months. Actually, I think the greater risk is the crew going insane from living in such a small and isolated shuttle for so long. Oh, and then there's the prolonged exposure to solar radiation with little to no protection.


"Computers are useless, they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Lynx
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Jan 2004
Location: IRC chat
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 15:48
Link
And like.. they don't get any sex.

I pwn.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 17:58
Link
Don't you watch films?
Let's assume it is a 4 'man' mission.

They will take one attractive female crew member, probably an archeologist, to satisfy the macho captain of the mission, about 2/3rds of the way through the journey.

The fat crew member and the clever one do not need female attention.


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 18:25 Edited at: 27th Jul 2005 18:26
Link
Quote: "we start building crap on the moon"


Me too, but the problem is there is no reason to so it won't happen.

It's not financially feasible either, it costs billions to plan such missions / get stuff to the moon. NASA isn't made of money, even if they do have alot of it.

The reason we went to the moon in the 60's in because it was a PR stunt for America, to make it seem better than Russia, there was pressure to do it, so it happened. There isn't any nowadays, people just don't care.


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Killswitch
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Oct 2002
Location: School damnit!! Let me go!! PLEASE!!!
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 22:08
Link
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the shuttle is designed just to get into orbit - not to actually go beyond earth. You need a pretty damned big rocket to escape the earths gravity completly.

Did you know that most modern scientific calculators have more computing power than any of the Apollo missions did? (Not sure if this means just the rocket or mission control as well, hell its still funny).

~It's a common mistake to make, the rules of the English langauge do not apply to insanity~
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 22:10
Link
Quote: "And I seriously doubt that they will go insane after only 10 months."


You clearly haven't thought that statement through, you'd be lucky if the crew hadn't already killed eachother off by the time they reached their destination.


"Computers are useless, they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 22:47
Link
We do have a reason to build on the moon - astronomy. There is not atmosphere on the moon to get in the way of viewing and you'll probably get a better picture from a stationary camera compared to one thats doing 10,000mph around earth...

My Website:
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 23:23
Link
Quote: "Oh, and then there's the prolonged exposure to solar radiation with little to no protection. "


Heard of rad suits ? Hardly a huge challenge to build current radiation protection into the bulky space suits we're using right now.

Quote: "You clearly haven't thought that statement through, you'd be lucky if the crew hadn't already killed eachother off by the time they reached their destination."


Scientists have spent months in space in spaces smaller than a tiny apartment before. They're trained and focused professionals .

Quote: "You need a pretty damned big rocket to escape the earths gravity completly."


I may be wrong but I believe that it's actually relatively easy to add the extra power to escape Earth's gravity; the problem is getting back into it, so we haven't tried . Once a small object is out as far as the moon is it takes hardly any energy to escape Earth's gravitational field.

If I looking for blog
Back to top
Profile PM
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 23:47
Link
You're completely right about everything, Ian T, but:

Quote: "Hardly a huge challenge to build current radiation protection into the bulky space suits we're using right now."


Isn't the problem when they aren't wearing their space suits, just in the shuttle? Radiation proofing would require something like led all around the ship, if I remember Physics correctly, which isn't practical. Also, if a solar flare happens, they wouldn't stand much of a chance, with no atmosphere etc... to help them out.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a rocket-scientist.


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 27th Jul 2005 23:50
Link
@ Nicholas Tompson

I never thought of that Good point!

Although, satellites that take photos of space usually aren't zooming round the world at 100,000,000mph; they can be made to be 'geo-stationary' - they stay in the same spot above the Earth's atmosphere. I think they just need to orbit at 36000m or something like that...

I suppose moon-astronomy may be a good reason to head for the moon again, but that wouldn't justify a manned mission or colonising of the moon.


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Briere
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Feb 2005
Location: Amherst New York, United States
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 00:22
Link
Why waste $$ on going to the moon/mars when we could use that money to research a cure for cancer

Formerly The Fixxer
http://www.xiemsoft.cjb.net
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 00:48
Link
What if the cure for cancer is on Mars?

Geostationary satellites ARE the moving ones :-P That have to move around the earth to sustain the same point above the surface.

My Website:
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 00:57 Edited at: 28th Jul 2005 00:58
Link
Quote: "Geostationary satellites ARE the moving ones :-P That have to move around the earth to sustain the same point above the surface.
"


Sorry, my mistake - what was I thinking...
Very correct, that teaches me for being a smart ass.

Quote: "Why waste $$ on going to the moon/mars when we could use that money to research a cure for cancer"


Again, true - but you could say that about anything really.
Why 'waste' money on cancer research when you could give it to third-world countries?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for Cancer Research - I donated the proceedings of my skate vid' premier to Cancer Research UK


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 08:58
Link
Russia is now offering anyone a trip to the moon for $100 million.

Seriously, not an exaggeration, I would spend the money if I had it. Even if I had $101 million, I would spend 100 of it to go to the moon.

I would rather go to Mars, but the moon is good enough

Actually I would MOVE to the moon if they were building residences up there now. Even though it would be isolated in the beginning--- it would TRULY be the opportunity of a lifetime.


My "everyone else has one so why can't I?" blog: http://www.jeku.com/blog/
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Oneka
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Apr 2004
Location: Hampton,VA
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 09:37
Link
!! Eric T's Icon is from Dogma the first 15mins of it Buddy Jesus i think it was xD

Yeah Space travel is cool.....

Yeah and the cancer thing in London i believe they have made this cancer smart bomb that finds tumors and explodes them or something...thats good xD

MARS

Making better games everday!
Oh yeah and just so you know its Oh-nek-a not One-ka!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Joe Cooning
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 14:16
Link
Quote: "And I seriously doubt that they will go insane after only 10 months."

Yeah. Some of us probably spend that much time in front of computers with about as much interaction. Maybe they should send one of us (I belive Jeku volenteered).

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 17:57
Link
Won't be going to the moon any time soon. Shuttles are grounded again.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 18:23
Link
Quote: "Anyways I bet you anything we're on the Moon in 10-15 years."


Almost 40 years have passed and we haven't gone up there much at all. I reckon more like 80-90 years until we'll even be thinking about living on it.


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
NanoBrain
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jan 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posted: 28th Jul 2005 22:18
Link
The shuttles are grounded, however, a new shuttle type is in the workings for 2010.

One question, the moon balances many things of the earth, without recent study, I cannot recall any from mind. This is a question brought foward in the past. Let us say that the moon becomes completely colonized, for some odd reason. What effect may this have upon the earth? Are there any intelligent phycisists out there who can answer this? Or, any great theoretical minds?


+NanoBrain+
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 01:32 Edited at: 29th Jul 2005 01:32
Link
I hate trying to sound smart,

but to answer NanoBrain's question - there would be no effect on the Earth if man were to completely colonise it. The mass of all the buildings on Earth as it is is neglibile compared to the mass of Earth itself, the same would apply to the moon.

We couldn't build enough on the moon to have a big enough mass to have an effect on the moon itself, let alone Earth, 1000's of miles away.

Don't forget - gravity is the weakest force.


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
soapyfish
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Oct 2003
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 01:21
Link
There's still a hell of a lot about Earth we don't know, why are we so desperate to go somewhere else. Oh ofcourse, because Earth's well and truly buggered for the future so we have to start looking for somewhere else to live now.

Anyone heard about that bit of debris that fell off as it launched either? Obviously someone forgot to stick that bit down.

When the power of love overcomes the love of the power... the world will know peace. - Jimi Hendrix

Bo**ocks to Blair
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
soapyfish
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Oct 2003
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 01:23
Link
Quote: "Don't forget - gravity is the weakest force."


Then why do I find it so hard to lift my big old behind out of my chair?

When the power of love overcomes the love of the power... the world will know peace. - Jimi Hendrix

Bo**ocks to Blair
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Perokreco
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 03:04
Link
First we go to other places to compare them to Earth so we can find out more about Earth itself.Secondly imagine a magnet a size of the Earth and piece of iron you would like lift.There would be no chance at all even if it would be only 10g.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 06:10
Link
Quote: "Anyone heard about that bit of debris that fell off as it launched either? Obviously someone forgot to stick that bit down."


They overestimated the strength of duct tape.


"Computers are useless, they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 06:18
Link
The greater issue is that whilst in space, other debris came loose and flew into one of the heat-resistant panels denting it. If the panel is seriously damaged then the ship will burn up on re-entry.


"Computers are useless, they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Merranvo
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th May 2005
Location: That ^ is a Orange
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 06:34 Edited at: 29th Jul 2005 06:35
Link
I have a solution to all of NASA's launch problems...

Simply make a massive gun, put a small ball that contains the Astronaut inside it, then use our country's oversized Nuclear Arsenal as propultion. Now we will not only would we put those weapons to good use. But it would cost less because we are overstocked as it is.

Then again... I don't think that anyone would allow us to detonate nukes anywhere in the US, and the UN probally wouldn't want us to either... Besides the fact that if the ball didn't melt...

Blasting, Shooting, and Maiming. Aspects of Modern Gamming.
Back to top
Profile PM
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 07:15
Link
stranger then fiction.

there were tests conducted in america that expelled objects into space using a very long magnetic strip that sped up the object and launched it into the sky with enough force it made it past the earths gravitational barrier.

it was designed to make re supplying of space stations cheaper and healthier for the environment.

unfortunately its not very good for delicate instruments or organic creatures due to the g forces and heat.

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself 
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 07:21
Link
Quote: "Then again... I don't think that anyone would allow us to detonate nukes anywhere in the US, and the UN probally wouldn't want us to either... Besides the fact that if the ball didn't melt..."


Then there's the problem of getting back!


"Computers are useless, they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 09:14
Link
That magnetic supply gun is really spiffy! That would allow you to either take more people up at once or use less fuel, all that weight spent in supplies that are supposed to last for months will be gone. Just blast them a pizza.


I'm going to eat you!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 19:03
Link
The magnetic supply gun would be a great way to rid the earth of all the garbage. Simply flinging large mounds and letting it burn up and whiz away into space, never to be seen again. *single tear*


My "everyone else has one so why can't I?" blog: http://www.jeku.com/blog/
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Class I Coder
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Apr 2004
Location:
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 22:05
Link
The magnetic 'thing' is a linear accelerator - it hasn't been tried at all. based on technology similar to maglev trains now being trialled.

last estimated cost for a mars mission that i saw was at least 1.3 trillion dollars(us). you wouldn't use the space shuttle or remake saturn 5's, you'd use energia.

problem with getting to/from mars is two fold. radiation and atmosphere. radiation - the amount you would receive led nasa to conclude it was only worthwhile sending ppl in their late 50's as their chances of getting cancer was slimmer than for a younger person. atmosphere - their isn't currently any way of reprocessing the atmoshere for the estimated two years a mars mission could take. every experiment in this regard has failed due to some form of toxic buildup.

using guns to get into space is nothing new - nasa proposed this decades ago. it would use multi segment chambers firing methane to reduce g forces (still couldn't be manned) to launch satellites.

just my two penneth.
Back to top
Profile PM
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 22:24
Link
Jeku-Have you seen the futurama episode where they did that? It was great.

I'm still confused where this radiation comes from. Actually not where it comes from, but why it is a problem.


I'm going to eat you!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 22:47
Link
because believe it or not us humans cant take much radiation, and our cells would all start to mutate and we would be dead very soon, and to protect us from the radiation you would need a stupidly thick layer of lead


Back to top
Profile PM Email
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 22:59 Edited at: 29th Jul 2005 23:00
Link
Yeah - radiation comes from the sun, and without an atmosphere to stop it, we would die in space. Quickly and very painfully. Lead will stop Gamma, Beta and Alpha radiation - all three types, but covering a spaceship is lead is obviously impractical.


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 23:01 Edited at: 29th Jul 2005 23:01
Link
@darkcoder-Thank you for that painfully obvious enlightenment.

Here's what I know:
All that radiation comes from the sun. On Earth we are protected by our atmosphere (the ozone layer in particular).
But, we've sent astronauts to live in space stations, no real radiation problems there. Mars is way the hell out there, how hard is it to construct a one-way portable environment that will shield out as much radiation as the Earth's atmosphere or maybe just enough that we're safe as long as we wear radiation suits?


I'm going to eat you!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 23:21
Link
im not sure you understand, radiation suites are only effective for short term exposure to low yield of radioactive substances, if a scientist had a radiation suite on he wouldent be prancing into a nuclear reactor any time soon, the same thing goes for a space shuttle or a spacestation, the hull is protected by a layer(s) of protective shielding but it can only withstand so much radiation, and if the sun produces a solar flare no radiation suite on earth will be able to protect you same goes for the hull of a shuttle, they are alot more effective against radiation than a suite, but there still not good enough, and the space stations we havent arent too far away from earth so they are being protected from our geo magnetic shield sufficiantly, im sure we could goto mars and base safely but its a big gamble of having clear space for thta duration of time.


Back to top
Profile PM Email
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 23:31
Link
I understand now, it's the trip between that would kill us. We could try and develop new materials that aren't as heavy as lead but still provide long term radiation protection and send them off with an unmanned probe with sensory equpiment recording how much radiation has penetrated the protective material. It'd be slow, but it'd be progress.


I'm going to eat you!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Drew Cameron
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jan 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 29th Jul 2005 23:32
Link
I'm sure they're already way ahead of you, BearCDP


Katie Holmes does not endorse D&C or Drew Cameron.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Aoneweb
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2002
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posted: 30th Jul 2005 00:28
Link
Due to safety reasons, and in keeping with fuel conservation, NASSA has announced the next wave of space travel vehicles, codename Catapult.
"The problem with the Catapult project", an NASSA spokesperson announced today, "is we cant work out how to get the ships back again" he went on to say "we tried the boomerang theory, but it kept coming back before we could conduct any tests, and kept smashing through our neighbors windows", the research continues, damm foam tiles.

Toshiba,3.2Ghz,ATI Radeon 9000 IGP 128mb,1.2gig of Ram,Windows XP Home. www.aoneweb.com

http://aoneweb.blogspot.com
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 30th Jul 2005 03:46
Link
well they could just use engines to get back/speed up afterall most of the fuel is used up on exiting our earths gravity, but if you sue the catapult the the gravity issure will cease to exist so burning the engines for a while wont be too bad, but the acceleration maybe a problem.


Back to top
Profile PM Email
UnderLord
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 30th Jul 2005 05:13
Link
Idea's for getting to mars include having a area of the shuttle that is shielded from the solar radiation but a small space it is. They';d only need it for a few months then they'd be somewhat safe for limited time periods Food and water are problems. As well as that little insanity issue.

But im sure we will one day build a station that is capable of building a ship from orbit and launching from orbit then we could build humungo spaceships to fly there and distroy those nasty aliens......damn little 3 eyed freaks.

When we talk to god, we're praying. When god talks to us, we're schizophrenic.
Back to top
Profile PM
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-15 13:48:16
Your offset time is: 2024-11-15 13:48:16