Sixth Meeting of the National Space Council - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15028554
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=N4wDE1_DTbQ


This video is worth a watch. Pence outlines America’s space ambitions. The return of great power rivalry is motivating America to return to space in a big way. Can’t let those Indians and Chinese have all the fun.

Some highlights:

Permanent presence on the moon. Base to be established in the southern polar region with an eye on H2O mining. Hopefully the personnel will be issued with cool 1960’s outfits as seen in Space 1999.

Human mission to Mars using nuclear thermal rocket propulsion. It’s just not the same when a robot plants the flag, so gotta send people.

Establishment of the US space cadet corps. Militarisation of space takes a huge step forward.


So it seems Trump is doing something substantial after all. Meanwhile, Bernie promises to release all government info regarding aliens if he is elected POTUS.

https://www.livescience.com/bernie-sanders-would-reveal-alien-information-if-elected.html

Thanks for that, Bernie. :lol:
#15028575
foxdemon wrote:Some highlights:

Permanent presence on the moon. Base to be established in the southern polar region with an eye on H2O mining. Hopefully the personnel will be issued with cool 1960’s outfits as seen in Space 1999.

Human mission to Mars using nuclear thermal rocket propulsion. It’s just not the same when a robot plants the flag, so gotta send people.

Establishment of the US space cadet corps. Militarisation of space takes a huge step forward.


Such announcement were made by every administration in the past decades. They led to nothing. It might be different this time because SpaceX has shaken up the space industry.

Sending humans beyond Earth orbit is ultimately pointless.
#15028671
Rugoz wrote:Such announcement were made by every administration in the past decades. They led to nothing. It might be different this time because SpaceX has shaken up the space industry.

Sending humans beyond Earth orbit is ultimately pointless.


The US Space Command (aka space cadets) is now offical. So that is a real change. France, Russia and China also have space commands now. Presumably India will follow. These space militaries are primarily concerned with defending and attacking satellites at this stage.

Low orbit is obviously the best place to station humans, since it is still protected by the magnetosphere. But, given a good reason to have people in space is to repair machines, they would have to venture further out when required.

There is a big move to harness commercial space, with an emphasis on supporting allies the Americans trust while denying technology to those countries they don’t trust. So Japan and Australia should do alright out of it. I wouldn’t be surprised if NASA helped develop the new equatorial launch site in Northern Australia. It would be easier to contain any launch accidents with those nuclear thermal rockets.

A lot of deadlines are 2024, so before Trump finishes his second term. We will have to wait and see how much is accomplished.
#15028952
ness31 wrote:Magnetosphere. I do believe I have found my word of the day.



It’s big word. Be careful with it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetosphere


Basically, Earth has a strong magnetic field for a planet of it’s size. This is due to a dynamic metal core. Possibly the presence of the moon is related to the Earth core structure. Earth/Moon can be thought of as a binary planet. This impacts our calculations for the possibility of life (as we know it, Jim) elsewhere in the universe.

The magnetosphere shields a lot of the cosmic radiation and also reduces solar wind effects on the atmosphere (ie: Earth is able to retain lighter gases that get blown away on other planets). So it is supposed to be a vital factor in permitting the development of life on Earth.

Of relevance here, the best place for humans in space in within the magnetosphere, since they get some shielding from cosmic radiation. They could still take short trips to fix stuff in more distant orbits or on the moon.

Some people are critical of NASA’s moon mission plan, as it involves a space station in lunar orbit.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/09/nasa-says-its-building-a-gateway-to-the-moon-critics-say-its-just-a-gate/
#15029125
I’m thinking if I would like to travel freely in space one day, the first thing I need to acquire is a suite of magnetospheres for every occasion. Who needs a poncey ‘gateway’ when they have a portable and customized magnetosphere?

Hows that for totally misusing a word? :excited:
Last edited by ness31 on 24 Aug 2019 16:33, edited 1 time in total.
#15029229
foxdemon wrote:The US Space Command (aka space cadets) is now offical. So that is a real change. France, Russia and China also have space commands now. Presumably India will follow. These space militaries are primarily concerned with defending and attacking satellites at this stage.

Low orbit is obviously the best place to station humans, since it is still protected by the magnetosphere. But, given a good reason to have people in space is to repair machines, they would have to venture further out when required.

There is a big move to harness commercial space, with an emphasis on supporting allies the Americans trust while denying technology to those countries they don’t trust. So Japan and Australia should do alright out of it. I wouldn’t be surprised if NASA helped develop the new equatorial launch site in Northern Australia. It would be easier to contain any launch accidents with those nuclear thermal rockets.

A lot of deadlines are 2024, so before Trump finishes his second term. We will have to wait and see how much is accomplished.


There's no good reason to have people in space to repair "machines" (unless they are already human-tended, like the ISS). It didn't make sense 50 years ago, and it makes even less sense today. Before you say "but Hubble..", NASA had to find uses for the Shuttle, Shuttle flights were basically sunk costs.

As for nuclear thermal rockets, they're meant for in-space propulsion between the Earth, Moon and Mars. They will never be used for launch from Earth. They have high efficiency but their trust-to-weight ratio is too low for launchers. Apart from that, launch accidents would be a distaster.
#15029259
ness31 wrote:I’m thinking if I would like to travel freely in space one day, the first thing I need to acquire is a suite of magnetospheres for every occasion. Who needs a poncey ‘gateway’ when they have a portable and customized magnetosphere?

Hows that for totally misusing a word? :excited:




Actually, you are not wrong. Ideally a spaceship carrying people on long duration trips would be able to generate a magnetic field to provide some extra shielding.


Rugoz wrote:There's no good reason to have people in space to repair "machines" (unless they are already human-tended, like the ISS). It didn't make sense 50 years ago, and it makes even less sense today. Before you say "but Hubble..", NASA had to find uses for the Shuttle, Shuttle flights were basically sunk costs.


I think it depends on how much infrastructure is in space. If there is a lot of infrastructure, involving many machines to be maintained, then it would make sense to keep human crews in orbit.

As for nuclear thermal rockets, they're meant for in-space propulsion between the Earth, Moon and Mars. They will never be used for launch from Earth. They have high efficiency but their trust-to-weight ratio is too low for launchers. Apart from that, launch accidents would be a distaster.


I mention the Australian launch facilities for nuclear rockets because, even if restricted to exo-atmospheric use, those nuclear reactors still have to be lifted into orbit in the first plaice. Better to do that away from heavily populated areas due to the danger of accidents.
#15029268
foxdemon wrote:I think it depends on how much infrastructure is in space. If there is a lot of infrastructure, involving many machines to be maintained, then it would make sense to keep human crews in orbit.

I mention the Australian launch facilities for nuclear rockets because, even if restricted to exo-atmospheric use, those nuclear reactors still have to be lifted into orbit in the first plaice. Better to do that away from heavily populated areas due to the danger of accidents.


- You would use telerobotics where AI isn't good enough, as it's done on Earth in hazardous environment, and space certainly qualifies as such.
- The nuclear thermal rockets will be launched cold. There's no danger whatsoever. Only in orbit they will be started for the first time.
#15029272
Rugoz wrote:
- You would use telerobotics where AI isn't good enough, as it's done on Earth in hazardous environment, and space certainly qualifies as such.
- The nuclear thermal rockets will be launched cold. There's no danger whatsoever. Only in orbit they will be started for the first time.


If a time delay was undesirable, then an immediate human presence would be required.


My understanding is the new thermal nuclear rockets are designed to minimise the possibility of fissile fuel being released into the environment in the event of a catastrophic launch failure.

Here’s an article about NASA’s interest in the North Territory launch site. Still early days.


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-01/ ... h/11370902[/url]

Another possible equatorial launch site would be Manus Island in PNG. It is right next to the equator.

This next article is an old one regarding Japan’s spaceport ambitions the S Pacific.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/japan-hopex-00d.html

I think they have suspended those plans but did get around to building a tracking station in Kiribati. I think the Australian government should try to rope both Japan and NASA into developing major space lift infrastructure in this region. Altimately it will become Asia’s main access to space and thus ought to be profitable.

Built it and they will come. :)
#15029921
I am of the belief that a return to space is necessary but not per se for security reasons. The real reason is towards mining adventures which will become increasingly necessary as the world shifts to EV applications and decentralized infrastructure. Rare metals such as lithium and cobalt will have to be sought in increasingly higher levels as demand rises for portable power cells that are used in everything from solar and wind generation to electric cars and consumer products.
#15029923
Rugoz wrote:- You would use telerobotics where AI isn't good enough, as it's done on Earth in hazardous environment, and space certainly qualifies as such.


Telerobotics is near useless in space because of lightlag and occlusion. It is only potentially useful in LEO where most of the reasons for wanting it do not apply.
#15030151
SolarCross wrote:Telerobotics is near useless in space because of lightlag and occlusion. It is only potentially useful in LEO where most of the reasons for wanting it do not apply.


All robotic probes in the solar system are remotely operated by humans to some degree, they're only partially autonomous. The best example are the rovers on Mars. Time delay is an issue, but obviously not a showstopper.
#15030234
Rugoz wrote:All robotic probes in the solar system are remotely operated by humans to some degree, they're only partially autonomous. The best example are the rovers on Mars. Time delay is an issue, but obviously not a showstopper.


Those probes are just cameras. Repair and builder bots will require more responsive controls. You were responding to Foxdemon argument about infrastructure in space.
#15030239
I don't see a way around it. It’s all about ‘time’ when we decide to leave our realm at speeds that defy our natural horal (yes it’s a word, I checked) limits. So yes, human intervention is a must. Unless we’ve found a way to simulate how humans experience time :) Otherwise, what’s the point?
#15030850
SolarCross wrote:Those probes are just cameras. Repair and builder bots will require more responsive controls. You were responding to Foxdemon argument about infrastructure in space.


No, the rovers are not just cameras. They navigate difficult terrain and take samples and analyze them. It's a very slow process, but we can expect big improvements in the future, space applications are always 10 years behind.

That said, if we had big infrastructure in space, it might make sense to send a few humans along to oversee the process. But I don't know what that infrastructure should be, in any near to medium term future.
#15030865
In all honesty, the main attraction of sending people into space is that it gets the public excited and thus fosters popular support for space programs. It is very much more expensive that robotic missions, but the difficulty does force development of new technologies.

Send humans to Mars, while aspiring to get them back alive, is going to be an impressive feat.
Trump and the Rule of Law

I think the last time, it was unanimous. It woul[…]

Ukrainegate

I did not say it was inappropriate, but since I[…]

I think it's pretty obvious. You get nukes becau[…]

Thing is, my own view: 1. They need to be punishe[…]