In light of the X-43, the ongoing debate on the space shuttle and ISS, the events occuring over on Saturn and Mars, and Fraser's article on the proposed space elevator, I'd like to ask the following question, in as close to a poll version as I can get.

Which of the following would be easiest and most fiscally responsible to do first and foremost?

a. complete ISS (and Bush's initiative)

b. space elevator

c. lunar colony

d. martian colony

e. other

Lunar Colony.

The ISS carries no forseeable benifits. There are no space resources to use in the middle of LEO. The moon is the best shot. It won't be cheap by any stretch of the imagination, and it won't be elegant or politically correct. But if we want a serious presence in space for other activities, a lunar base would go a long way towards getting us there.

__________________
http://amssolarempire.blogspot.com

A lunar coloney is the best chice in my opinion
seeing as it has more benifits then any other option!!!

The ISS will eventualy have to be brought back like mier so it may be good for short term ,but not for long.

An elevator is point less!, it poses to much of a hazard to other aerospace vehicles, & even more important it would be highly difficult to create with all the engineering problems.

But once a lunar coloney is operational Mars should be next.

__________________
Challenging Limits

www.fullscap.com

www.howearthworks.com
www.climatechange.com.au

Harvesting solar energy from space seems more like a good way to start. Even at low effeciency rate, the trade off will be positive and direct.
Space travel would then be an interresting by product.

__________________
Have you found the loop or the loophole?

[size=7] Well my vote is for our nation to finish it's international obligations, i.e. the ISS, and then it's full speed ahead to fulfilling President Bush's vision of Moon to Mars.

ISS is going to have more of a role in President Bush's Moon to Mars vision than most people have guessed yet. I personally look for it to become a assembly center and way station for the Lunar and Mars crews and the Crew Exploration Vehicles.

Be safe and be well,

Random

__________________
Living my dream everyday.

They would have to seriously adjust it's orbit, which would make the member nations mad. Right now it would be extremely inefficient to stop at the international space station since it isn't aligned correctly for lunar or martian transfer.

__________________
http://amssolarempire.blogspot.com

I think if the member nations choose to become involved in President Bush's vision, any hard feelings over the orbit of the ISS being boosted and changed will be minimal. They would all reconize that it's mission and purpose has changed.

I am curious to see if it will become another race to the Moon or a cooperative effort between the spacefaring nations of the world. China, India, and of course the USA have all announced plans to send people back to the moon.

Personally I'm very torn over that. As a man who loves his country, and also being the type to go it alone in my personal life, I sometimes would like to see the USA go to the Moon and Mars on on it's own without help or assistance. Anyway, we got there first and sort of feel some ownership of the moon. Realsitically though, the Moon belongs to no one and yet everyone.

But I've met some Russian cosmonauts and have come to respect them and their program. USA and Russia especially have built a close partnership when it comes to space. If it wasn't for Russia, the ISS would have had to be abandoned after Columbia and probably would have already crashed to Earth.

Russia is a good example of a country where they have broad citizen support and therefore, even though they have third world resources, they have had a pretty successful space program that at times far outshines the USA. If our citizens in the USA even halfway supported the space program like Russian citizens, we would have had lunar bases on the moon for decades now and already have people living on Mars. Sorry, I digress.

It probably should be a international effort with USA and Russia taking the lead roles because of their extensive experences in space. Just keep the United Nations out of it. Those greedy idiots would have us digging deep holes in the Earth insisting that is the shorted route to Mars.

Be safe and be well,

Random

__________________
Living my dream everyday.

You clearly have no idea how much fuel it will take to change the orbit of the ISS to what would be required. It will be cheaper to just build a new station in the right place than to move the ISS. Remember, it weighs 200 tons, and is moving about 8000 miles an hour in the wrong direction. How would you fix it?

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak

Why can't a couple ion engines be used? The orbit does not have to be changed overnight, if NASA deems that the orbit needs to be changed. An ion engine or two, firing continously over a several month period, might be able to do the job. The Europeans just sent a probe to the moon using a simular method I believe.

I don't have all the answers antoniseb, but please remember, ignorance and stupidity are not interchangeable words. Ignorance can be cured. That's why I come to this site, to be cured of my ignorance.

__________________
Living my dream everyday.

I called you neither stupid nor [in the large] ignorant. You were expressing something that many people have as a misconception, that is, things in space are easy to move from one orbit to another.

Concerning the ion engines, just as an exercise, imagine that half the power coming from the ISS solar panels was used to drive all the ion engines that much power could drive. How long would it take to change that much momentum? How much Xenon would we have to send up there. You are right that it can't be done overnight.

On the other hand, such an effort might make a good target to inspire the development of larger-scale ion drives, even if they would take a very long time to do this job.

Speaking of ion driven space-craft, I had imagined that a good mission for something like that would be to have a few of these things flying in low Earth orbit trying to collect to loose bolts and nuts flying dangerously.

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak

A current problem with the ISS right now is the degrading of it's orbit. The Russian crafts can only boost the station a small bit, nothing compared to what the shuttle can do. I wonder if they installed a few low powered ion engines that ran constantly 24/7, if the current boosting problem would be solved. I don't know how much xenon would be needed or how much it weighs, how hard it is to transport, how cost effective, etc. But it's a solution worth looking at.

Anyway, using craft powered by ion engines to gather up space junk in LEO is a wonderful idea and a need whose time has come. Have you submitted that idea to NASA antoniseb? They are quite receptive to outside ideas.

__________________
Living my dream everyday.

No, not yet. I don't know what I'm waiting for, but I haven't felt motivated enough to actually write up a specific proposal.

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak

Considering we just discussed this in a public forum, I would suggest you get off your duff and get that proposal submitted my friend before someone else does. B)

It would be a lifesaver for future astronauts and payloads. It's getting pretty crowded up there with space junk. Every time we launch, it's like running a gauntlet through LEO before reaching a higher orbit or beyond.

Be safe and be well,

Random63

__________________
Living my dream everyday.

B. The Space Elevator. Completion of a space elevator makes all of the others possible at a fraction of current costs. Instead $10,000 per pound to get mass into orbit, the space elevator is projected to do the job at approximately $100-500 per pound. Also, space shots using rockets can't occur every day on an on-going basis. The time to build, test, and launch rockets can take from weeks to years. A fully functioning space elevator system can have hundreds of tons of hardware sent up to anywhere from LEO, GEO, and beyond all day, every day. You want a Lunar Colony? Try to build one by launching the hardware on modern rockets and pay for it. You'd be lucky to get a small facility capable of supporting 6 people for less than $100 billion. Build the space elevator first, for about $15 billion dollars, and you could use the other $85 billion to build a lunar colony capable of supporting hundreds, maybe thousands, of people. The key is to get the launch costs down and nothing so far has promised to be cheaper than the space elevator.

__________________
...and we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere; and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys...

How about connecting the space elevator to the ISS?

One of the plans is to have a station at the GEO point. LEO is a different matter, though. The station would create a gravitational drag on the cable. That wouldn't be very stable. Of course, since the station would be built by lifting the materials to the construction site, it would be very inexpensive allowing for a much larger station with more capabilities.

__________________
...and we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere; and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys...

e.Other
Government has very little interest in creating colonies or industries beyond their command, based on results. On the bright side, the US has a bill in process to make it easier for the private sector to access space (still subject to govt approval). Businessmen and adventurers will do it. No soi-disant democracy will-- the electorate won't foot the bill. Unfortunately, I am -5 from Greenwich. S
PS My earlier information was too optimistic.

__________________
Ignoramus et ignorabamus.-- Reymond

Wir mussen wissen. Wir werden wissen.--Hilbert

Pick one.

I think there is one caveat, wstevenbrown, that you left out. The government will fund some of these, partially, if it means a new and sizable source of future revenue for the government in the form of taxes. If an American company can profitably mine the Moon or asteroids, the source of revenue in taxes could be huge. The government would fund something like a space elevator to allow the cheap access to and from space in order to facilitate companies starting these industries. The government is already funding the research to make these kinds of things possible. All of the technology necessary to sustain a manned Lunar research outpost would translate over to a mining operation.

__________________
...and we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere; and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys...

I agree partially, but I think you are overly optimistic. How would govt secure the space elevator from terrorism? Let's say, to keep it reasonable, some bunch of nut cases who thought it sinfully prideful to re-enact the Babel legend. Only by consolidating its own power to absolute status, I'm afraid, would a govt undertake such a project. Neither logic nor reasonableness will prevail-- for the vast majority, perception IS reality. S

__________________
Ignoramus et ignorabamus.-- Reymond

Wir mussen wissen. Wir werden wissen.--Hilbert

Pick one.

Space elevator indeed. Make the space elevator, then you guys can get to your lunar colony and back with all the nifty resources you buy from the man in the moon when you're there.

In regards to the ISS orbit decay. sure, 200 tonnes is alot of weight, but with a few little ion engines running 24/7- Thats the best idea I've heard in a while.

After all, Slow and Steady Wins the Race....

__________________
~ cogito cogito ergo cogito sum ~

Nothing in life is good nor bad; thinking makes it so.