|
Posted by Fred J. McCall on February 3, 2009, 6:56 am
Please log in for more thread options
:wrote:
:
show/hide quoted text
:>Boeing once claimed that it could build a fleet of fully reusable space
:>shuttles that could be operated like commercial jet liners at similar costs.
:
:Boeing once claimed they could build a supersonic passenger aircraft.
:They failed, miserably.
:
Well, no. What they did was come to the conclusion that they couldn't
make any money at it.
:
:Meanwhile the Brits and the Frogs had one
:flying just three weeks after the 747 first flew, close on FORTY*
:years ago.
:
And never made a nickel with them except by dint of the most
imaginative accounting.
--
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
-- Charles Pinckney
|
|
Posted by Pat Flannery on February 3, 2009, 12:13 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Mike wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Boeing once claimed they could build a supersonic passenger aircraft.
> They failed, miserably.
Oh, they could have built it alright... what stopped the project is they
wanted the government to pay for the R&D on it, like Britain and France
did for the development of the Concorde.
show/hide quoted text
> Meanwhile the Brits and the Frogs had one
> flying just three weeks after the 747 first flew, close on FORTY*
> years ago.
And guess which was the more commercially successful of those two aircraft?
Concorde never even recouped it R&D cost during operations, and barely
turned a profit even with those being ignored.
On the other hand, Boeing made a fortune off of the 747, with 1,409
having been built as of October of last year.
Pat
|
|
Posted by BradGuth on January 31, 2009, 8:31 pm
Please log in for more thread options show/hide quoted text
> > I'm sorry, I don't see the connection of then with now really. It
> > certainly was a kind of publicity war then, and arguably the arms race =
on
show/hide quoted text
> > top etc, bankrupted the ussr etc, but the reason we ought to go back is
> > because we can and because for reasons language does not give us, peopl=
e
show/hide quoted text
> > need to explore and find things out. We should be perusing happiness no=
t
show/hide quoted text
> > money after all. OK we have all reared the arguments about if all the
> > money in the rich countries was spread evenly everyone would be
> > comfortable and safe. However, if this =A0is not to be done, the tiny a=
mount
show/hide quoted text
> > in =A0proportionate terms, that exploration costs, has got to be worth =
it.
show/hide quoted text
> > If nobody had =A0gone anywhere we would probably still be living in cav=
es
show/hide quoted text
> > and no know about other countries at all.
> > I feel though that it should be a world project, myself.
> > Brian
> I think it's silly to spend hundreds of billions of dollars (maybe even
> trillions) just to go back and gather some more rocks.
> It currently costs over $10,000 per pound to send anything to low Earth
> orbit. We should instead focus on bringing that price down, maybe to less
> than $10 per pound. Maybe then we could go to the Moon and Mars.
All inclusive, we're spending perhaps <$100,000 per net usable kg in
LEO, and all-inclusive it'll likely cost us a minimum of $1M/kg < $10M/
kg that's intended to safely walk upon our physically dark Selene/moon
and to get such a living kg back to Earth, plus there'd be a likely
need of the banked bone marrow transplant and perhaps loads of stem
cells necessary in order to insure a reasonable quality of life for
each of those involved with that kind of mission.
~ BG
|
|
Posted by on February 1, 2009, 3:32 pm
Please log in for more thread options http://www.space-video.info/speech/19620912-jfk-rice-text.html
If you would actually trouble yourself to read the speech which you
are commenting upon you will see there was no blistering attack of the
Russians no references to a war in space. You will see his commitment
to progress as the guiding principle - not war - establishing for the
US a leading role - not beating down anyone else - taking on
acceptable challenges worthy of our nation as a measure of our
capabilities with the expectation that there will be rewards
commensurate to those challenges;
Excerpted from John F. Kennedy's 'moon speech'
* * *
This is a breathtaking pace, and such a pace cannot help but create
new ills as it dispels old, new ignorance, new problems, new dangers.
Surely the opening vistas of space promise high costs and hardships,
as well as high reward.
So it is not surprising that some would have us stay where we are a
little longer to rest, to wait. But this city of Houston, this State
of Texas, this country of the United States was not built by those who
waited and rested and wished to look behind them. This country was
conquered by those who moved forward--and so will space.
William Bradford, speaking in 1630 of the founding of the Plymouth Bay
Colony, said that all great and honorable actions are accompanied with
great difficulties, and both must be enterprised and overcome with
answerable courage.
If this capsule history of our progress teaches us anything, it is
that man, in his quest for knowledge and progress, is determined and
cannot be deterred. The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we
join in it or not, and it is one of the great adventures of all time,
and no nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can
expect to stay behind in the race for space.
Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first
waves of the industrial revolutions, the first waves of modern
invention, and the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation
does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space.
We mean to be a part of it--we mean to lead it. For the eyes of the
world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and
we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of
conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we
shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with
instruments of knowledge and understanding.
Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this Nation
are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our
leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and
security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require
us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for
the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring
nation.
We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be
gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for
the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science
and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will
become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United
States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether
this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of
war. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the
hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the
hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored
and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the
mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of
ours.
There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space
as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the
best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation many
never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our
goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35
years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this
decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because
they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure
the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one
that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
It is for these reasons that I regard the decision last year to shift
our efforts in space from low to high gear as among the most important
decisions that will be made during my incumbency in the office of the
Presidency.
* * *
A fabulous speech. JFK also made a speech to a group as Senator back
in 1956 where he spoke of the nuclear airplane program. This program
and other military based nuclear propulsion programs were subsumed
into Project Nerva - in 1961 when the new President took office. This
was disbanded Nov 1963 - in the first act of LBJ when he took
office.
The creation of a space faring culture was reduced to landing a man on
the moon immediately after the assasination. This was further reduced
to a man in space program under Nixon following the moon landing and
moonships under construction were paid for and mothballed rather than
flown.
It was an over-riding concern in the Eisenhower administration that
Sputnik and the Russians were attempting to lead America into a costly
race in space as an attempt to divert funds away from more necessary
military expenditures and as a means to penetrate our military secrets
as they had gotten our atom bomb secrets through the Rosenbergs. JFK
didn't see it this way. He saw that space travel could be the moral
equivalent of war, without the destructiveness of war, and the
potential of great payoff. He was alone in this view, and after his
death, LBJ immediately withdrew toward Eisenhower's stance, while
committed to continuing on the moon journey. Nixon put an end to
travel beyond Earth orbit, and America's grand experiment in space
travel ended - as space travel enthusiasts were marginalized by
popular fiction - as in Star Trek - or by UFO rumors. The rational
sober discussions of the 1950s and early 60s re space travel - were no
more - as the discussion was polarized and marginalized by extremists
and crazies and largley ignored by the mainstream press as a serious
issue.
But space travel IS a serious issue. Exploration of the frontier is a
vital component in maintaining a healthy center. Without a frontier
the center collapse in on itself in conflict over diminishing
resource. With a frontier the center cooperates in developing new
resources in the frontier. Without a frontier we are a culture in
decline and doomed to failure - this is the lesson of history since
history has been written. With a frontier we are a growing culture
with a bright and vibrant future ahead. This too is the lesson of
history since history has been written.
Since November 22, 1963 the USA, and as leader of the world, the
world, has been a culture in decline. We have never been better off
as a global industrial culture than we were in 1963. Before that
year, we saw a continuing growth in every measure of fundamental
social performance stretching over 150 years. After that year, we
suffered from a steady inevitable decline in every measure of
performance.
Someone spoke of disparagingly of moonrocks. This isn't the point.
To understand the point we have to ask ourselves what is the
fundamental figure of merit for space travel performance? In
computing Edwin Moore demonstrated it was $/feature - how much it cost
to produce a computing element. Moore used this argument to construct
the famous Moore curve and chart thed development of computing over
the next century. To understand space faring technology, we need a
similar measure of fundamental performance to chart a similar course.
What is it?
The answer is - $/momentum - how much momentum you can impart to a
payload for a given amount of money. With this we can construct a
Mook curve - haha. Momentum is mass x velocity - its dimensions are
kg meters per second.
kg meters per second - is also known as a Newton-second.
F x t = kg m / s
Force times time equals kg meter per second.
A mass flow rate - kg/sec - times a velocity - is measured in force
F = kg m / s2 = (kg/s) * (m/s)
So, this gives an important relationship. The amount of force we
apply gives us the mass flow rate off world. The cost of thrust - is
a fundamental measure of performance.
This is very similar to the way fleet capacity is measured in
international shipping. The figure of merit there is displacement -
the weight that can be floated - and the cost of that displacement.
So, its not surprising that lifting capacity is an important figure in
rocketry.
The economic impact of a place is given by mass flow rate of material
from that place. Each American for example consumes about two tons of
oil products per year and three tons of coal per year - which gives a
measure of economic impact.
Americans import about 11x as much as everyone else on average - on a
per person basis. 14 tons per year versus a global average of a
little more than 1.2 tons per year.
The world is a single economic entity in part because we can transport
sufficient cargo each year at an acceptable cost throughout the
world. In 2006 according to the IMO 7.5 billion metric tons of cargo
were shipped throughout the world by a fleet capable of floating 1.1
billion deadweight tons.
For everyone to live as well as the average American, the world would
have to consume 11x as much material as it now does. This is
impossible with present resources. So, we must abandon this idea, and
the idea of progress, as we fight over dwindling resources, or we can
embrace the idea that we can gather materials off world and supply
them in sufficient quantities to meet all our needs on Earth for
everyone. We maintain our relative position geopolitically by leading
the world to a better more abundant future - to maintain our safety
and the safety of the global community.
The total cost of all the ships is about $1,000 billion - about $1,000
per dwt. Approximately $120 billion is spent every year on 120
million dwt. Another $130 billion is spent operating the fleet.
So, we're talking 7.5 billion tons transported for $250 billion - this
is about $30 per ton for transport costs.
It takes between 30 and 90 days to ship something from anywhere to
anywhere else on the globe with the average 60 days.
Clearly if we were to achieve similar shipping costs, times and
capacities throughout the solar system, we could make industrial use
of the solar system to meet our growing resource needs.
Now the minimum delta-vee - change in velocity - required to transport
something from the Surface of the Earth to somewhere else in the solar
system is well defined by astronomy. So, using this information we
can figure out what the relative costs of providing materials from
different parts of the solar system are.
The cost targets to match our current ocean going fleet with a space
faring fleet of comparable costs are $1,000 per ton of payload - which
is about 1/10,000th the cost of space craft today.
The capacity costs to match our current ocean going fleet with space
faring fleet capable of meeting the needs of a growing world economy -
is 1 billion tons of payload capacity - growing to 12 billion tons of
payload capacity - in 15 years.
Can we achieve these figures? If there is a fundamental reason we
cannot, then Eisenhower was right - this is a chimera not worth the
effort. If there is no fundamental reason, if in fact the technology
is readily at hand, then Kennedy was right and the age of space faring
nations is upon us and whomever dominates the development of our
interplanetary frontier will dominate future history.
Bottom line - JFK was right, Eisenhower/Nixon were wrong.
Its rather easy to construct a Mook curve using historical data - it
looks like this;
1950 - small suborbital payloads -
1960 - large orbiting payloads
1970 - very large cislunar payloads
At this point - progress ended. But it was clear that continued heavy
investment in space faring technology - proposed by Kennedy at Rice
University at the start of the space program would have given us;
1980 - extraordinarily large interplanetary payloads
and since interstellar travel is many times more difficult than
interplanetary travel, we would have gone through this development arc
again at a far lower price point with continued developments;
1990 - personal suborbital rocket in every garage
2000 - personal orbiting rocket in every garage
2010 - personal interplanetary cruiser
At this point there would have been - as Heinlein pointed out - a
diaspora of humanity across the cosmos.
Since in terms of momentum, the surface of the Earth is in pretty much
the same energetic position with respect to the universe - and since
space faring technology transcends Earth - we see that developments in
space science have the same impact on all people everywhere and create
global political paradigms as a result.
Joseph Campbell in his book, The Inner Reaches of Outer Space, shows
that we cannot touch our collective frontier without the very act
changing the meaning of things deep within us. This is true of space
faring activity.
There are also specific changes in the way things are due to technical
development. We saw three fundamental shifts in capacity - as a
result of our investments in space faring in the 1950s and 60s as
outlined above. These resulted in very specific changes in the way
things were for the world - which resulted in changes for everyone
everywhere - leading to an emerging global community;
1950s - small suborbital payloads - means ICBM - intercontinental
ballistic missile. This means MAD - mutual assured destruction - as
the only means of defense - since the whole world is the ICBMs battle
field. There are no places to hide. This means for the first time in
history - nations must negotiate among themselves to avoid war, and
engage in intelligence activities to avoid conflict in the first
place. As a result, from 1950 onward, nation states waged no all out
global war. In contrast between 1900 and 1950 two major world wars
were fought. So, the first outcome of space faring development -
world peace
1960s - large orbiting payloads - means comsats, weathersats, spysats,
navsats. This means internet, global communications, global village,
global business. There are no places beyond communication and
commerse. As a result from 1960 onward, nation states found they
benefitted far more from economic cooperation than economic
competition. As a result, world trade increased dramatically.
1970s - very large orbiting payloads - manned space travel - Apollo.
The focus of our first step in space. The photographs of the Earth
from the vicinity of the moon changed the conciousness of a
generation. It released a revolutionary idea into the world - the
Earth as a place without borders, without boundaries - that we all
shared in common as a common heritage of all people everywhere. As a
result, we had the gaia hypothesis, and the environmental movement.
Not reported and widely appreciated yet - perhaps supressed to some
small degree - and marginalized - were the personal revelations of
about 1/3 of those who visited the moon. Alan Bean became an artist
to communicate this vision beyond the present era. Edgar Mitchell
started the Noetic Institute to preserve capture and expand upon his
insights. Others sought more traditional psychiatric treatments.
Others withdrew from public life. Still others entered religious
orders. This is an unwritten chapter in an unfinished story that has
yet to begin. Some have said the photo of Earth from the vicinity of
the moon gave rise to the environmental movement and was worth the
cost of Apollo. The insights of those who took those photos, and the
deeper meaning of the experience - along with fresh experiences from
future explorers - will continue this story which is now on hold.
Once told - we will see how much Nixon and company gave up to avoid
wasting money in space - while he spent hundreds of billions of
dollars and tens of thousands of lives 'securing' the jungles of
Vietnam.
Commercialization of so called heavy lift launchers - especially
resuable launchers - would have given us the first commercial manned
space travel by the mid 70s, and the deployment of large networks of
direct communications satellites by the late 70s and the deployment of
large numbers of power satellites by the early 80s.
In the 1970s - continued research with nuclear propulsion would have
given us capacities in the 1980s to move worlds - across the solar
system. We could travel at will across the solar system, survey all
the small bodies in the solar system - and return the richest of those
to Earth orbit.
Direct broadband from anywhere on Earth to any other - would have
given us an intense tele-robotic capabiity - which has numerous
applications. One is operating solar powered factories on orbit - to
process rich asteroidal feedstock into goods that are then distributed
to anyone anywhere on Earth using solar powered rail guns on orbit and
GPS guidance along with MEMs based rocket arrays to effect safe
efficient landings at low cost.
This by 1990.
MEMs based rocket arrays, laser powered, using solar pumped lasers on
orbit as primar power - provide a means to deliver first packages
anywhere on Earth in minutes. Then, give rise to the personal
spaceship - capable first of suborbital flight - and later - orbiting
flight.
This capacity, combined with large numbers of telerobot jobs on orbit
- and large quantities of raw materials and continuous solar power on
orbit - give rise to what Isaac Asimov called SPACE HOMES - spomes -
this is the true benefit of O'Neill colonies. Gerard O'Neill was a
Princeton professor who designed vacuum chambers for Fermilab and
CERN. He realized the same technology that allowed him to build a
vacuum chamber many miles across on Earth, could be adapted quite
easily to build pressure vessels many miles across on orbit. With raw
materials derived from captive asteroids on orbit, unlimited power
from sun without night, and unlimited manpower avaiable through direct
broadband - such pressure vessels could be made on orbit at a rate
exceeding the rate of automobile or computer production on Earth.
Combined with ultra-low-cost MEMs based rocket arrays -
http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMJPC2005_1177/PV2005_3650.pdf
powered by space based lasers
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/laser_propulsion_000705.html
it is quite feasible to create an infrastructure where there is a
spaceship in every garage. Hydrogen powered jet arrays
http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/9818
power lift-off and climb to an altitude where laser sustained
propulsion from space is possible - from there flight anywhere on
Earth in minutes - or flight to orbit in minutes - is effected.
This is how by 1990 - we could have all gone to an space home - in
orbit around Earth.
Increasing the power level of the solar power satellites is a very
direct way to achieve increases in propulsive capacity. This is
achieved by building solar power satellites in orbit around the sun -
INSIDE the orbit of Mercury. At about 3 million km from the Sun,
we're 1/50th the distance to the sun as we are at Earth. This means
we're operating at 2500x the light intensity - which means the cost
per unit power - all things being equal - is 1/2500 as much as earth
orbiting powersats.
Terawatt scale laser beams generated at very low cost from very large
satellites in orbit around the Sun - built on Earth orbit and using
solar light and solarwind to navigate from Earth orbit to their final
location near the sun - give rise to a truly monumental transport
capacity between worlds - and beyond the solar system.
O'Neill space colonies, and Bernal spheres - privately owned - using
the tremendous power stations just described - easily move beyond
Earth - and even for the adventurous - beyond the sun
http://www.nss.org/settlement/space/oneillcylinder.htm
http://pdf.aiaa.org/jaPreview/JSR/1984/PVJAPRE8632.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/r_bryant42/ish-one.html
These are very real developments that could have been attained well
before 2000AD. For many budding aerospace engineers, the visions of
2001:A Space Odyssey - were tame - if not lame - by comparison to what
WE were dreaming about well BEFORE 2000.
We can do this today. I have even incorporated it in my long term
planning for my energy business
http://www.mokenergy.com
this includes;
Converting all the world's 4,000 coal fired power plants to hydrogen
gas - where the hydrogen is made at a cost of $110 per ton from water
and sunlight. Here 5.5 billion tons of coal is replaced with 870
million tons of hyrogen derived from 8 billion kiloliters of water --
avoiding the emission of 16 billion tons of CO2.
Terrestrial solar is the first large-scale use of off world resources
in human economy.
Converting half the 5.5 billion tons of coal into 17 billion barrels
of suncrude by adding 300 million tons of hydrogen to 2.75 billion
tons of coal.
Once this is in place, mandate the reduction of conventional oil from
28 bilion barrels to 14 billion barrels.
Add 180 million tons of hydrogen to 550 million tons of methane
delivering the same heat content as 1,100 million tons of methane used
currently.
In this way we;
1) cut demand for coal oil and natural gas at the source by half
2) cut the price for these products by more than half
3) cut carbon emissions of humanity by half
4) increase oil supply by 16%
5) put a massive hydrogen infrastructure in place
We next use solar pumped free electron lasers on orbit to beam bandgap
matched light to terrestrial solar arrays - increasing their power
output 16x over that of solar panels alone. Excess energy is used to
expand hydrogen supplies.
In this way, we use the existing infrastructure built in the first
step, to provide 47 years of continuous compound growth at a rate of
6% per year - while reducing costs and pollution levels.
Developments in improved beam steering allow millions of mobile
recievers to be illuminated at once from a single orbiting platform -
giving rise to space power networks, and fleets of personally owned
laser powered rockets
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/summary/93518266/SUMMARY?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
http://www.photonics.cusat.edu/Research_Nonlinear%20Optics_OPC.html
A phase conjugate mirror is used to build a solar pumped laser and
then illuminated by a pilot beam from the reciever. A power beam
retraces the path of the pilot beam to the reciever regardless of
relative motions of the two bodies - or the medium between them.
This was one of the secrets of SDI - but it is rather straightforward
to make a power transfer coupling between a powerful sunpower
satellite and a bandgap matched reciever - or laser rocket propulsion.
As I said, this could all have been achieved well before 2000. It
could be achieved today - with a dedicated effort - directed along
lines of profitability rather than politically motivated research.
NACA - the predecessor of NASA - helped organize R&D to solve problems
facing the emerging airline industry in the early half of the 20th
century. NASA and its research labs - along with access to military
labs by qualified vendors - under NASA control - could perform a
similar role in developing space industry the same way.
2010 - reusable heavy lift launcher
2015 - nuclear pulse propulsion
2020 - mems based propulsive skin
2025 - O'Neill space home
2030 - deep space propulsion
2010 - we will see a return to the moon, the development of large
direct broadcast arrays, and telepresence and telerobotics on a
massive scale - along with first generation power satellites
2015 - here we see an enhanced nonproliferation treaty - converting
the entire world's supply of weapons grade fissiles into non-
threatening triggers for propulsive units, the organization of a
piloted grand tour of the solar system, the establishment of a city on
the moon and a city on mars and manned outposts at major sites
throughout the solar system - and a completion of the first survey of
the small bodies of the solar system - oriented toward the deflection
of those that harm earth and the capture of those that benefit earth.
Combined with teleoperations and space power from the first step - the
creation and deployment of remotely controlled solar powered factories
on orbit using captured asteoidal feedstock - with the distribution of
materiel to all people of Earth. All nuclear research and nuclear
materials are held by an international body administered by the UN on
the moon. The goal here is to fuel and manage the growing fleet of
nuclear pulse rockets. Travel from Earth to moon and back occurs via
heavy lift reusable chemical launchers. Lifting heavy payloads from
Earth to space using nuclear pulse is limited to establishing early
stage infrastructure and then operations are always beyond Earth for
nuclear pulse.
2020 - mems based propulsive skin - used first as low cost braking
rockets for delivery packages from orbit, then adapted to point to
point delivery on Earth, then, personal suborbital transport, and
finally, orbiting personal spaceship.
2025 This gives rise to a housing development boom on orbit, as people
move to large estates on orbit, and work at factories on orbit.
2030 Laser assisted rockets and jets extend the range of these systems
beyond Earth orbit - the construction and deployment of terawatt scale
lasers inside the orbit of Mercury, along with large fresnel lenses
spaced throughout the solar system - provide a means to power worlds,
and move spacehomes at will, anywhere in the solar system, and with
advances in optics and laser lightsail tech, to nearby stars for
adventurous homeowners. this is the golden age of spacetravel - this
re-establishes on a cosmic scale the situation humans are best suited
for psychologically - a small band of like minded people roaming
within a vast frontier.
This will require reorganizing our military and civilan labs toward
this purpose - under NASA - and giving NASA an executive head - denied
it by Eisenhower so it would forever be a political football and
powerless to effect national policy.
Once that were achieved, providing tax benefits for investments, and
funding a space development bank to the tune of $250 billion per year
- for four years - would get things started. This along with the
other changes, and the visionary path charted out above - would make
it so - to quote Patrick Stewart.
|
|
Posted by Jonathan on February 1, 2009, 11:42 pm
Please log in for more thread options
show/hide quoted text
> http://www.space-video.info/speech/19620912-jfk-rice-text.html
> If you would actually trouble yourself to read the speech which you
> are commenting upon you will see there was no blistering attack of the
> Russians no references to a war in space.
You're quoting the Rice Stadium speech given on Sept 12, 1962.
I'm quoting the original address to the Joint Session of Congress
on May 25,1961.
Just a few of his Soviet remarks from the first speech in which the
Moon program was announced....
"For the adversaries of freedom did not create the revolution; nor did they
create the conditions which compel it. But they are seeking to ride the crest of
its wave--to capture it for themselves.
Yet their aggression is more often concealed than open. They have fired no
missiles; and their troops are seldom seen. They send arms, agitators, aid,
technicians and propaganda to every troubled area. But where fighting is
required, it is usually done by others--by guerrillas striking at night, by
assassins striking alone--assassins who have taken the lives of four thousand
civil officers in the last twelve months in Vietnam alone--by subversives and
saboteurs and insurrectionists, who in some cases control whole areas inside of
independent nations."
"They possess a powerful intercontinental striking force, large forces
for
conventional war, a well-trained underground in nearly every country, the power
to conscript talent and manpower for any purpose, the capacity for quick
decisions, a closed society without dissent or free information, and long
experience in the techniques of violence and subversion. They make the most of
their scientific successes, their economic progress and their pose as a foe of
colonialism and friend of popular revolution. They prey on unstable or unpopular
governments, unsealed, or unknown boundaries, unfilled hopes, convulsive change,
massive poverty, illiteracy, unrest and frustration.]"
"With these formidable weapons, the adversaries of freedom plan to
consolidate their territory--to exploit, to control, and finally to destroy the
hopes of the world's newest nations; and they have ambition to do it before the
end of this decade. It is a contest of will and purpose as well as force and
violence--a battle for minds and souls as well as lives and territory. And in
that contest, we cannot stand aside."
IX. SPACE
Finally, if we are to win the battle that is now going on around the world
between freedom and tyranny, the dramatic achievements in space which occurred
in recent weeks should have made clear to us all, as did the Sputnik in 1957,
the impact of this adventure on the minds of men everywhere, who are attempting
to make a determination of which road they should take.
Recognizing the head start obtained by the Soviets with their large rocket
engines, which gives them many months of leadtime, and recognizing the
likelihood that they will exploit this lead for some time to come in still more
impressive successes, we nevertheless are required to make new efforts on our
own. For while we cannot guarantee that we shall one day be first, we can
guarantee that any failure to make this effort will make us last. We take an
additional risk by making it in full view of the world, but as shown by the feat
of astronaut Shepard, this very risk enhances our stature when we are
successful.
I therefore ask the Congress, above and beyond the increases I have earlier
requested for space activities, to provide the funds which are needed to meet
the following national goals:
First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the
goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him
safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more
impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of
space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. We propose to
accelerate the development of the appropriate lunar space craft. We propose to
develop alternate liquid and solid fuel boosters, much larger than any now being
developed, until certain which is superior. We propose additional funds for
other engine development and for unmanned explorations--explorations which are
particularly important for one purpose which this nation will never overlook:
the survival of the man who first makes this daring flight. But in a very real
sense, it will not be one man going to the moon--if we make this judgment
affirmatively, it will be an entire nation. For all of us must work to put him
there.
X. CONCLUSION
" In conclusion, let me emphasize one point. It is not a pleasure for any
President of the United States, as I am sure it was not a pleasure for my
predecessors, to come before the Congress and ask for new appropriations which
place burdens on our people. I came to this conclusion with some reluctance. But
in my judgment, this is a most serious time in the life of our country and in
the life of freedom around the globe,'
This is a key quote showing his thinking.
"the impact of this adventure on the minds of men everywhere, who are
attempting to make a determination of which road they should take."
It's pretty easy to see he thought the space race was a proxy war between
the US and Soviet....political systems. It's one thing to spend more on
the military than an adversary, but the space race was all about winning
a high profile technology race, thus winning the 'hearts and minds'
of the rest of the world over which system is better.
show/hide quoted text
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Speeches/JFK/003POF03NationalNeeds05251961.htm>
You will see his commitment> to progress as the guiding principle - not war -
establishing for the> US a leading role - not beating down anyone else - taking
on> acceptable challenges worthy of our nation as a measure of our> capabilities
with the expectation that there will be rewards> commensurate to those
challenges;>> Excerpted from John F. Kennedy's 'moon speech'>> * * *>> This is a
breathtaking pace, and such a pace cannot help but create> new ills as it
dispels old, new ignorance, new problems, new dangers.> Surely the opening
vistas of space promise high costs and hardships,> as well as high reward.>> So
it is not surprising that some would have us stay where we are a> little longer
to rest, to wait. But this city of Houston, this State> of Texas, this country
of the United States was not built by those who> waited and rested and wished to
look behind them. This country was> conquered by those who moved forward--and so
will space.>> William Bradford, speaking in 1630 of the founding of the Plymouth
Bay> Colony, said that all great and honorable actions are accompanied with>
great difficulties, and both must be enterprised and overcome with> answerable
courage.>> If this capsule history of our progress teaches us anything, it is>
that man, in his quest for knowledge and progress, is determined and> cannot be
deterred. The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we> join in it or not,
and it is one of the great adventures of all time,> and no nation which expects
to be the leader of other nations can> expect to stay behind in the race for
space.>> Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first>
waves of the industrial revolutions, the first waves of modern> invention, and
the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation> does not intend to founder
in the backwash of the coming age of space.> We mean to be a part of it--we mean
to lead it. For the eyes of the> world now look into space, to the moon and to
the planets beyond, and> we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a
hostile flag of> conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed
that we> shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with>
instruments of knowledge and understanding.>> Yet the vows of this Nation can
only be fulfilled if we in this Nation> are first, and, therefore, we intend to
be first. In short, our> leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for
peace and> security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all
require> us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for>
the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring> nation.>>
We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be> gained, and
new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for> the progress of all
people. For space science, like nuclear science> and all technology, has no
conscience of its own. Whether it will> become a force for good or ill depends
on man, and only if the United> States occupies a position of pre-eminence can
we help decide whether> this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new
terrifying theater of> war. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected
against the> hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against
the> hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored> and
mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the> mistakes that
man has made in extending his writ around this globe of> ours.>> There is no
strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space> as yet. Its hazards
are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the> best of all mankind, and its
opportunity for peaceful cooperation many> never come again. But why, some say,
the moon? Why choose this as our> goal? And they may well ask why climb the
highest mountain? Why, 35> years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play
Texas?>> We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this>
decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because> they are
hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure> the best of our
energies and skills, because that challenge is one> that we are willing to
accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and> one which we intend to win, and
the others, too.>> It is for these reasons that I regard the decision last year
to shift> our efforts in space from low to high gear as among the most
important> decisions that will be made during my incumbency in the office of
the> Presidency.>> * * *>> A fabulous speech. JFK also made a speech to a group
as Senator back> in 1956 where he spoke of the nuclear airplane program. This
program> and other military based nuclear propulsion programs were subsumed>
into Project Nerva - in 1961 when the new President took office. This> was
disbanded Nov 1963 - in the first act of LBJ when he took> office.>> The
creation of a space faring culture was reduced to landing a man on> the moon
immediately after the assasination. This was further reduced> to a man in space
program under Nixon following the moon landing and> moonships under construction
were paid for and mothballed rather than> flown.>> It was an over-riding concern
in the Eisenhower administration that> Sputnik and the Russians were attempting
to lead America into a costly> race in space as an attempt to divert funds away
from more necessary> military expenditures and as a means to penetrate our
military secrets> as they had gotten our atom bomb secrets through the
Rosenbergs. JFK> didn't see it this way. He saw that space travel could be the
moral> equivalent of war, without the destructiveness of war, and the> potential
of great payoff. He was alone in this view, and after his> death, LBJ
immediately withdrew toward Eisenhower's stance, while> committed to continuing
on the moon journey. Nixon put an end to> travel beyond Earth orbit, and
America's grand experiment in space> travel ended - as space travel enthusiasts
were marginalized by> popular fiction - as in Star Trek - or by UFO rumors. The
rational> sober discussions of the 1950s and early 60s re space travel - were
no> more - as the discussion was polarized and marginalized by extremists> and
crazies and largley ignored by the mainstream press as a serious> issue.>> But
space travel IS a serious issue. Exploration of the frontier is a> vital
component in maintaining a healthy center. Without a frontier> the center
collapse in on itself in conflict over diminishing> resource. With a frontier
the center cooperates in developing new> resources in the frontier. Without a
frontier we are a culture in> decline and doomed to failure - this is the lesson
of history since> history has been written. With a frontier we are a growing
culture> with a bright and vibrant future ahead. This too is the lesson of>
history since history has been written.>> Since November 22, 1963 the USA, and
as leader of the world, the> world, has been a culture in decline. We have
never been better off> as a global industrial culture than we were in 1963.
Before that> year, we saw a continuing growth in every measure of fundamental>
social performance stretching over 150 years. After that year, we> suffered
from a steady inevitable decline in every measure of> performance.>> Someone
spoke of disparagingly of moonrocks. This isn't the point.> To understand the
point we have to ask ourselves what is the> fundamental figure of merit for
space travel performance? In> computing Edwin Moore demonstrated it was
$/feature - how much it cost> to produce a computing element. Moore used this
argument to construct> the famous Moore curve and chart thed development of
computing over> the next century. To understand space faring technology, we
need a> similar measure of fundamental performance to chart a similar course.>>
What is it?>> The answer is - $/momentum - how much momentum you can impart to
a> payload for a given amount of money. With this we can construct a> Mook
curve - haha. Momentum is mass x velocity - its dimensions are> kg meters per
second.>> kg meters per second - is also known as a Newton-second.>> F x t = kg
m / s>> Force times time equals kg meter per second.>> A mass flow rate - kg/sec
- times a velocity - is measured in force>> F = kg m / s2 = (kg/s) * (m/s)>> So,
this gives an important relationship. The amount of force we> apply gives us
the mass flow rate off world. The cost of thrust - is> a fundamental measure of
performance.>> This is very similar to the way fleet capacity is measured in>
international shipping. The figure of merit there is displacement -> the weight
that can be floated - and the cost of that displacement.> So, its not surprising
that lifting capacity is an important figure in> rocketry.>> The economic impact
of a place is given by mass flow rate of material> from that place. Each
American for example consumes about two tons of> oil products per year and three
tons of coal per year - which gives a> measure of economic impact.>> Americans
import about 11x as much as everyone else on average - on a> per person basis.
14 tons per year versus a global average of a> little more than 1.2 tons per
year.>> The world is a single economic entity in part because we can transport>
sufficient cargo each year at an acceptable cost throughout the> world. In 2006
according to the IMO 7.5 billion metric tons of cargo> were shipped throughout
the world by a fleet capable of floating 1.1> billion deadweight tons.>> For
everyone to live as well as the average American, the world would> have to
consume 11x as much material as it now does. This is> impossible with present
resources. So, we must abandon this idea, and> the idea of progress, as we
fight over dwindling resources, or we can> embrace the idea that we can gather
materials off world and supply> them in sufficient quantities to meet all our
needs on Earth for> everyone. We maintain our relative position geopolitically
by leading> the world to a better more abundant future - to maintain our safety>
and the safety of the global community.>> The total cost of all the ships is
about $1,000 billion - about $1,000> per dwt. Approximately $120 billion is
spent every year on 120> million dwt. Another $130 billion is spent operating
the fleet.> So, we're talking 7.5 billion tons transported for $250 billion -
this> is about $30 per ton for transport costs.>> It takes between 30 and 90
days to ship something from anywhere to> anywhere else on the globe with the
average 60 days.>> Clearly if we were to achieve similar shipping costs, times
and> capacities throughout the solar system, we could make industrial use> of
the solar system to meet our growing resource needs.>> Now the minimum delta-vee
- change in velocity - required to transport> something from the Surface of the
Earth to somewhere else in the solar> system is well defined by astronomy. So,
using this information we> can figure out what the relative costs of providing
materials from> different parts of the solar system are.>> The cost targets to
match our current ocean going fleet with a space> faring fleet of comparable
costs are $1,000 per ton of payload - which> is about 1/10,000th the cost of
space craft today.>> The capacity costs to match our current ocean going fleet
with space> faring fleet capable of meeting the needs of a growing world economy
-> is 1 billion tons of payload capacity - growing to 12 billion tons of>
payload capacity - in 15 years.>> Can we achieve these figures? If there is a
fundamental reason we> cannot, then Eisenhower was right - this is a chimera not
worth the> effort. If there is no fundamental reason, if in fact the
technology> is readily at hand, then Kennedy was right and the age of space
faring> nations is upon us and whomever dominates the development of our>
interplanetary frontier will dominate future history.>> Bottom line - JFK was
right, Eisenhower/Nixon were wrong.>> Its rather easy to construct a Mook curve
using historical data - it> looks like this;>> 1950 - small suborbital payloads
-> 1960 - large orbiting payloads> 1970 - very large cislunar payloads>> At this
point - progress ended. But it was clear that continued heavy> investment in
space faring technology - proposed by Kennedy at Rice> University at the start
of the space program would have given us;>> 1980 - extraordinarily large
interplanetary payloads>> and since interstellar travel is many times more
difficult than> interplanetary travel, we would have gone through this
development arc> again at a far lower price point with continued developments;>>
1990 - personal suborbital rocket in every garage> 2000 - personal orbiting
rocket in every garage> 2010 - personal interplanetary cruiser>> At this point
there would have been - as Heinlein pointed out - a> diaspora of humanity across
the cosmos.>> Since in terms of momentum, the surface of the Earth is in pretty
much> the same energetic position with respect to the universe - and since>
space faring technology transcends Earth - we see that developments in> space
science have the same impact on all people everywhere and create> global
political paradigms as a result.>> Joseph Campbell in his book, The Inner
Reaches of Outer Space, shows> that we cannot touch our collective frontier
without the very act> changing the meaning of things deep within us. This is
true of space> faring activity.>> There are also specific changes in the way
things are due to technical> development. We saw three fundamental shifts in
capacity - as a> result of our investments in space faring in the 1950s and 60s
as> outlined above. These resulted in very specific changes in the way> things
were for the world - which resulted in changes for everyone> everywhere -
leading to an emerging global community;>> 1950s - small suborbital payloads -
means ICBM - intercontinental> ballistic missile. This means MAD - mutual
assured destruction - as> the only means of defense - since the whole world is
the ICBMs battle> field. There are no places to hide. This means for the first
time in> history - nations must negotiate among themselves to avoid war, and>
engage in intelligence activities to avoid conflict in the first> place. As a
result, from 1950 onward, nation states waged no all out> global war. In
contrast between 1900 and 1950 two major world wars> were fought. So, the first
outcome of space faring development -> world peace>> 1960s - large orbiting
payloads - means comsats, weathersats, spysats,> navsats. This means internet,
global communications, global village,> global business. There are no places
beyond communication and> commerse. As a result from 1960 onward, nation states
found they> benefitted far more from economic cooperation than economic>
competition. As a result, world trade increased dramatically.>> 1970s - very
large orbiting payloads - manned space travel - Apollo.> The focus of our first
step in space. The photographs of the Earth> from the vicinity of the moon
changed the conciousness of a> generation. It released a revolutionary idea
into the world - the> Earth as a place without borders, without boundaries -
that we all> shared in common as a common heritage of all people everywhere. As
a> result, we had the gaia hypothesis, and the environmental movement.> Not
reported and widely appreciated yet - perhaps supressed to some> small degree -
and marginalized - were the personal revelations of> about 1/3 of those who
visited the moon. Alan Bean became an artist> to communicate this vision beyond
the present era. Edgar Mitchell> started the Noetic Institute to preserve
capture and expand upon his> insights. Others sought more traditional
psychiatric treatments.> Others withdrew from public life. Still others entered
religious> orders. This is an unwritten chapter in an unfinished story that
has> yet to begin. Some have said the photo of Earth from the vicinity of> the
moon gave rise to the environmental movement and was worth the> cost of Apollo.
The insights of those who took those photos, and the> deeper meaning of the
experience - along with fresh experiences from> future explorers - will continue
this story which is now on hold.> Once told - we will see how much Nixon and
company gave up to avoid> wasting money in space - while he spent hundreds of
billions of> dollars and tens of thousands of lives 'securing' the jungles of>
Vietnam.>> Commercialization of so called heavy lift launchers - especially>
resuable launchers - would have given us the first commercial manned> space
travel by the mid 70s, and the deployment of large networks of> direct
communications satellites by the late 70s and the deployment of> large numbers
of power satellites by the early 80s.>> In the 1970s - continued research with
nuclear propulsion would have> given us capacities in the 1980s to move worlds -
across the solar> system. We could travel at will across the solar system,
survey all> the small bodies in the solar system - and return the richest of
those> to Earth orbit.>> Direct broadband from anywhere on Earth to any other -
would have> given us an intense tele-robotic capabiity - which has numerous>
applications. One is operating solar powered factories on orbit - to> process
rich asteroidal feedstock into goods that are then distributed> to anyone
anywhere on Earth using solar powered rail guns on orbit and> GPS guidance along
with MEMs based rocket arrays to effect safe> efficient landings at low cost.>>
This by 1990.>> MEMs based rocket arrays, laser powered, using solar pumped
lasers on> orbit as primar power - provide a means to deliver first packages>
anywhere on Earth in minutes. Then, give rise to the personal> spaceship -
capable first of suborbital flight - and later - orbiting> flight.>> This
capacity, combined with large numbers of telerobot jobs on orbit> - and large
quantities of raw materials and continuous solar power on> orbit - give rise to
what Isaac Asimov called SPACE HOMES - spomes -> this is the true benefit of
O'Neill colonies. Gerard O'Neill was a> Princeton professor who designed vacuum
chambers for Fermilab and> CERN. He realized the same technology that allowed
him to build a> vacuum chamber many miles across on Earth, could be adapted
quite> easily to build pressure vessels many miles across on orbit. With raw>
materials derived from captive asteroids on orbit, unlimited power> from sun
without night, and unlimited manpower avaiable through direct> broadband - such
pressure vessels could be made on orbit at a rate> exceeding the rate of
automobile or computer production on Earth.> Combined with ultra-low-cost MEMs
based rocket arrays ->>
http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMJPC2005_1177/PV2005_3650.pdf>> powered by
space based
show/hide quoted text
lasers>>http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/laser_propulsion_000705.html>>
it is quite feasible to create an infrastructure where there is a> spaceship in
every garage. Hydrogen powered jet arrays>>
http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/9818>> power lift-off and climb to an
altitude where laser sustained> propulsion from space is possible - from there
flight anywhere on> Earth in minutes - or flight to orbit in minutes - is
effected.>> This is how by 1990 - we could have all gone to an space home - in>
orbit around Earth.>> Increasing the power level of the solar power satellites
is a very> direct way to achieve increases in propulsive capacity. This is>
achieved by building solar power satellites in orbit around the sun -> INSIDE
the orbit of Mercury. At about 3 million km from the Sun,> we're 1/50th the
distance to the sun as we are at Earth. This means> we're operating at 2500x
the light intensity - which means the cost> per unit power - all things being
equal - is 1/2500 as much as earth> orbiting powersats.>> Terawatt scale laser
beams generated at very low cost from very large> satellites in orbit around the
Sun - built on Earth orbit and using> solar light and solarwind to navigate from
Earth orbit to their final> location near the sun - give rise to a truly
monumental transport> capacity between worlds - and beyond the solar system.>>
O'Neill space colonies, and Bernal spheres - privately owned - using> the
tremendous power stations just described - easily move beyond> Earth - and even
for the adventurous - beyond the sun>>
http://www.nss.org/settlement/space/oneillcylinder.htm>
http://pdf.aiaa.org/jaPreview/JSR/1984/PVJAPRE8632.pdf>
http://www.geocities.com/r_bryant42/ish-one.html>> These are very real
developments that could have been attained well> before 2000AD. For many
budding aerospace engineers, the visions of> 2001:A Space Odyssey - were tame -
if not lame - by comparison to what> WE were dreaming about well BEFORE 2000.>>
We can do this today. I have even incorporated it in my long term> planning for
my energy business>> http://www.mokenergy.com>> this includes;>> Converting all
the world's 4,000 coal fired power plants to hydrogen> gas - where the hydrogen
is made at a cost of $110 per ton from water> and sunlight. Here 5.5 billion
tons of coal is replaced with 870> million tons of hyrogen derived from 8
billion kiloliters of water --> avoiding the emission of 16 billion tons of
CO2.>> Terrestrial solar is the first large-scale use of off world resources> in
human economy.>> Converting half the 5.5 billion tons of coal into 17 billion
barrels> of suncrude by adding 300 million tons of hydrogen to 2.75 billion>
tons of coal.>> Once this is in place, mandate the reduction of conventional oil
from> 28 bilion barrels to 14 billion barrels.>> Add 180 million tons of
hydrogen to 550 million tons of methane> delivering the same heat content as
1,100 million tons of methane used> currently.>> In this way we;>> 1) cut
demand for coal oil and natural gas at the source by half> 2) cut the price for
these products by more than half> 3) cut carbon emissions of humanity by half>
4) increase oil supply by 16%> 5) put a massive hydrogen infrastructure in
place>> We next use solar pumped free electron lasers on orbit to beam bandgap>
matched light to terrestrial solar arrays - increasing their power> output 16x
over that of solar panels alone. Excess energy is used to> expand hydrogen
supplies.>> In this way, we use the existing infrastructure built in the first>
step, to provide 47 years of continuous compound growth at a rate of> 6% per
year - while reducing costs and pollution levels.>> Developments in improved
beam steering allow millions of mobile> recievers to be illuminated at once from
a single orbiting platform -> giving rise to space power networks, and fleets of
personally owned> laser powered
rockets>>http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/summary/93518266/SUMMARY?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0>>
http://www.photonics.cusat.edu/Research_Nonlinear%20Optics_OPC.html>> A phase
conjugate mirror is used to build a solar pumped laser and> then illuminated by
a pilot beam from the reciever. A power beam> retraces the path of the pilot
beam to the reciever regardless of> relative motions of the two bodies - or the
medium between them.>> This was one of the secrets of SDI - but it is rather
straightforward> to make a power transfer coupling between a powerful sunpower>
satellite and a bandgap matched reciever - or laser rocket propulsion.>> As I
said, this could all have been achieved well before 2000. It> could be achieved
today - with a dedicated effort - directed along> lines of profitability rather
than politically motivated research.>> NACA - the predecessor of NASA - helped
organize R&D to solve problems> facing the emerging airline industry in the
early half of the 20th> century. NASA and its research labs - along with access
to military> labs by qualified vendors - under NASA control - could perform a>
similar role in developing space industry the same way.>> 2010 - reusable heavy
lift launcher> 2015 - nuclear pulse propulsion> 2020 - mems based propulsive
skin> 2025 - O'Neill space home> 2030 - deep space propulsion>> 2010 - we will
see a return to the moon, the development of large> direct broadcast arrays, and
telepresence and telerobotics on a> massive scale - along with first generation
power satellites>> 2015 - here we see an enhanced nonproliferation treaty -
converting> the entire world's supply of weapons grade fissiles into non->
threatening triggers for propulsive units, the organization of a> piloted grand
tour of the solar system, the establishment of a city on> the moon and a city on
mars and manned outposts at major sites> throughout the solar system - and a
completion of the first survey of> the small bodies of the solar system -
oriented toward the deflection> of those that harm earth and the capture of
those that benefit earth.> Combined with teleoperations and space power from the
first step - the> creation and deployment of remotely controlled solar powered
factories> on orbit using captured asteoidal feedstock - with the distribution
of> materiel to all people of Earth. All nuclear research and nuclear>
materials are held by an international body administered by the UN on> the moon.
The goal here is to fuel and manage the growing fleet of> nuclear pulse
rockets. Travel from Earth to moon and back occurs via> heavy lift reusable
chemical launchers. Lifting heavy payloads from> Earth to space using nuclear
pulse is limited to establishing early> stage infrastructure and then operations
are always beyond Earth for> nuclear pulse.>> 2020 - mems based propulsive skin
- used first as low cost braking> rockets for delivery packages from orbit, then
adapted to point to> point delivery on Earth, then, personal suborbital
transport, and> finally, orbiting personal spaceship.>> 2025 This gives rise to
a housing development boom on orbit, as people> move to large estates on orbit,
and work at factories on orbit.>> 2030 Laser assisted rockets and jets extend
the range of these systems> beyond Earth orbit - the construction and deployment
of terawatt scale> lasers inside the orbit of Mercury, along with large fresnel
lenses> spaced throughout the solar system - provide a means to power worlds,>
and move spacehomes at will, anywhere in the solar system, and with> advances in
optics and laser lightsail tech, to nearby stars for> adventurous homeowners.
this is the golden age of spacetravel - this> re-establishes on a cosmic scale
the situation humans are best suited> for psychologically - a small band of like
minded people roaming> within a vast frontier.>> This will require reorganizing
our military and civilan labs toward> this purpose - under NASA - and giving
NASA an executive head - denied> it by Eisenhower so it would forever be a
political football and> powerless to effect national policy.>> Once that were
achieved, providing tax benefits for investments, and> funding a space
development bank to the tune of $250 billion per year> - for four years - would
get things started. This along with the> other changes, and the visionary path
charted out above - would make> it so - to quote Patrick Stewart.>>>>>
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Re: ..Why we Went to the Moon....Why we Shouldn't go Back! | January 31, 2009, 1:51 pm |
| Re: ..Why we Went to the Moon....Why we Shouldn't go Back! | January 31, 2009, 6:06 pm |
| Re: ..Why we Went to the Moon....Why we Shouldn't go Back! | February 1, 2009, 10:42 pm |
| Re: ..Why we Went to the Moon....Why we Shouldn't go Back! | February 2, 2009, 6:15 am |
| Back to the moon, only CEV reuseable? | September 22, 2005, 10:40 pm |
| Japan First Back To The Moon! | November 13, 2007, 9:34 am |
| The news said it costs 2 million dollars to bring the shuttle back to Florida on the back of the 747 | June 4, 2009, 9:15 am |
| Re: United Nations 1979 Moon Treaty -- Prohitbiting the militarization of the Moon, Mars and asteroids. | July 31, 2008, 4:34 pm |
| Can they still go back to ISS? | July 16, 2006, 12:55 pm |
| Re: I'M BACK!! | October 5, 2009, 3:37 am |
|
XML Sitemap
:>shuttles that could be operated like commercial jet liners at similar costs.