Author Topic: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF  (Read 16609 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
BTW, the moon is also supposed to be a source of Helium-3, which, when fused with itself in a fusion reaction, is supposed to directly produce energy with radioactive byproducts.  Woot!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton-proton_chain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium-3_Propulsion
http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/gallery/pdf/space_com063000.pdf

 

Offline Colonol Dekker

  • HLP is my mistress
  • Moderator
  • 213
  • Aken Tigh Dekker- you've probably heard me
    • My old squad sub-domain
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
Well since they believe Ice is also located on the moon on the dark side of the moon we might even see some sort of a base or lauch platform for Mars missions somewhere in th enear future. Actualy it is rather funny we already have the tech to go all the way to Mars and eve beyond(if money alows it) but we are just not suited for these long term exposures to no gravity. Kinda funny dont ya think?

Yeah.....  I have to add, i'm not that big on 40 year + voyages.

45mins a day commuting is enough to do my head in frankly :)
Campaigns I've added my distinctiveness to-
- Blue Planet: Battle Captains
-Battle of Neptune
-Between the Ashes 2
-Blue planet: Age of Aquarius
-FOTG?
-Inferno R1
-Ribos: The aftermath / -Retreat from Deneb
-Sol: A History
-TBP EACW teaser
-Earth Brakiri war
-TBP Fortune Hunters (I think?)
-TBP Relic
-Trancsend (Possibly?)
-Uncharted Territory
-Vassagos Dirge
-War Machine
(Others lost to the mists of time and no discernible audit trail)

Your friendly Orestes tactical controller.

Secret bomb God.
That one time I got permabanned and got to read who was being bitxhy about me :p....
GO GO DEKKER RANGERSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
President of the Scooby Doo Model Appreciation Society
The only good Zod is a dead Zod
NEWGROUNDS COMEDY GOLD, UPDATED DAILY
http://badges.steamprofile.com/profile/default/steam/76561198011784807.png

 

Offline MarkN

  • 26
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
I don't know where you get the idea it would take 40 years to ge to mars from. All the estimates I have seen are that:
1) it would take between 3 weeks and a year
2) people have already been in space for the period of time  as the small end of the estimate.


The real problem with going to mars is the size of the rocket needed, as many of the proposals involved rockets larger than saturn 5 - and that's assuming it is assembled in orbit!

 

Offline Mars

  • I have no originality
  • 211
  • Attempting unreasonable levels of reasonable
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
The USSR sent people into space in the high estimate... and we all know how they ended up.

 

Offline AlphaOne

  • !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • 210
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
Then again so did NASA! Both of them have they sins. Well whi not use the ISS for the construction of a roket big enough to get to mars?
Die shivan die!!
Then jumps into his apple stealth pie and goes of to war.What a brave lad....what a brave lad say the ladies in red.
 

(\_/)
(O.o)
(> < ) 

This is Bunny . Copy  Bunny  into your signature to help him on his way to world domination!

 

Offline achtung

  • Friendly Neighborhood Mirror Guy
  • 210
  • ****in' Ace
    • Freespacemods.net
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
Then again so did NASA! Both of them have they sins. Well whi not use the ISS for the construction of a roket big enough to get to mars?

Because you would have to ferry base materials up, which would probably be just as costly.
FreeSpaceMods.net | FatHax | ??????
In the wise words of Charles de Gaulle, "China is a big country, inhabited by many Chinese."

Formerly known as Swantz

 

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
IMO, we'd need either that gravity-negating disc that they've been working on (Pop Mech) or anchor an asteroid(s) to Earth using a tether, and hoist stuff up with elevator(s).

 

Offline MarkN

  • 26
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
there are many problems with the concept of a space elevator, in that to start with there is no material known that is strong and light enough to be practical (even nanotubes are too heavy). Also the act of pulling something up the elevator (or even having something hanging from it) would pull the anchor downward, causing it's orbit to destabilise unless boosted. as for launching a mars mission from the ground, the section that leaves orbit would be the size of a Saturn 5, and adding launch stages to that would greatly increase it's size, resulting in something so large that it is impractical. Remember, with Saturn 5, more than half the length of the rocket (and two thirds of the volume) were used just to reach orbit.

 

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
Gravity disc it is, then.

  

Offline brozozo

  • Used to be d3r3k.
  • 27
    • MySpace
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
Gravity disc it is, then.

Could you elaborate on this magical disc? I've never heard of it before.

 

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
ERg... I'm gonna have to dig it up.

 

Offline MarkN

  • 26
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
There are two options for the so-called 'gravity disc'. The first uses EM waves to generate a plasma around it and pushes it backward, and so as it is an air-breathing engine, it unsuited for anything except first-stage use, and as it needs a lot of power, a nuclear jet would probably be better (or even better an Nulclear liquid air cycle engine). The other so-called gravity disc utilises a superconducting annulus, spinning at high speed, to pruduce an apparent upward force on anything above it. However, the experiment has only rarely been repaeted (not enough to prove that the results of the original experiment was not due so some other factor. If this works however, this has only been seen above a horizontal spinning disc, and so is more use for simulating zero-G than as propulsion. In fact the only (theoretical) propulsive effect that this branch of science has produced a design for, is a gravitational/electromagnetic transducer, and this design doesn't even have a disc (it has a slab).

 
 

Offline MarkN

  • 26
Re: The Aircraft controversy over the JSF
Thanks, I hadn't heard of Li's work before.