12
   

NASA's plan for a floating city above Venus

 
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 06:45 am
@Setanta,
500 millibars just might do it. The livestock would be a good idea, too. They fart a lot. A cheap, efficient soda lime rebreathing unit would probably be all it took to move about the local environment. All you have to do is heat the soda lime and it's good to go again. I'm thinking this is doable.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 06:48 am
@FBM,
Oh yeah, i agree completely. There would be abundant solar power, and you could have unmanned craft land fissionable material for small nuke reactors to generate large amounts of entery. The biggest job would be to get nitrogen from Titan.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 06:57 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Oh yeah, i agree completely. There would be abundant solar power, and you could have unmanned craft land fissionable material for small nuke reactors to generate large amounts of entery. The biggest job would be to get nitrogen from Titan.


Alrighty, after a quick Googling, I can see that it would be a big gamble to try to find enough nitrogen locked in the minerals known to Mars to support a colony. Getting it from Titan is the next best solution, but ****. The technological/engineering hurdles. Sad
TheJackal
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 07:31 am
@FBM,
Space elevator... You could literally anchor one, attach a giant hose, and suck it right out of the atmosphere by an orbiting tanker. And I do believe Titan's gravity a far less than Earth's, and thus making the elevator concept far more feasible
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 08:45 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
Look at how fast going to the moon died once we had collected a few rocks, we did not even finish the Apollo missions and we never went back. There has to be a point, otherwise no one is going to pay the freight...

"No one" is certainly false, although it's clear that Congress is composed of people who are incapable of long term thinking.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 08:49 am
@TheJackal,
TheJackal wrote:
We won't know without trying... However I agree that Mars is the superior choice.. I also think Venus is a test bed for colonizing the upper atmospheres of the gas giants, and ways we could harvest resources from them.

Profitably mining gases from the gas giants is so far beyond our capability that right now is simply not the time to spend money on it. We can barely get people to commit to a return to the Moon. We need to crawl before we can walk.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 05:06 pm
I just read that the wind speed in the middle cloud layer of Venus's atmosphere can reach 450 miles an hour (724 kph). Not sure what it's be in the upper layers, but if it's anywhere near that...big problem.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 08:41 pm
Either I missed it, or the article I first cited here did not mention, the floating city over Venus would be in use just thirty days.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 08:50 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe's source wrote:
"Eventually, a short duration human mission would allow us to gain experience having humans live at another world, with the hope that it would someday be possible to live in the atmosphere permanently," Jones said.


EB, i believe people were responding to this comment.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 08:57 pm
@Setanta,
I just read a different link a few minutes back, which mentioned the thirty day time limit.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 09:01 pm
Your original post said something to the effect of "about a month." I think that people were responding to the portion of the article which i quoted above.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 09:05 pm
Okay. I just forgot. I understand that you all were discussing the other matter.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 09:09 pm
Thirty days is not a lot of time to get a lot of science done. And with Venus's unique conditions, I'm not sure how much it could contribute to future missions to other planets. Hmm. I was enthusiastic at first, but now I'm thinking maybe the money might be better allocated elsewhere.
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2014 09:15 pm
This is a great ... um ... day dream but not much else. When NASA dreams big like this yet comes out with this:
Quote:
While NASA has no current plans to fund the concept, the Langley-based team continues its work with the hope the space agency could make the plan come to fruition within several decades.

It's never going to get funded. It's NEVER going to happen.

When there's a project that has no near-future timeline then I wouldn't place any hopes it will ever seriously move beyond wishful thinking/concept phase.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 07:55 pm
@tsarstepan,
Name for the town? NEW ZEPPOLINA, of course.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 05:55 am
NASA's massive social media advertising campaign has coincided with the recent Orion test launch. All the tall claims made by the US space agency have been disapproved of by many renowned veteran NASA aerospace engineers.

They believe that the Orion spacecraft and the rocket which NASA calls the Space Launch System (SLS) are not the deep space transportation system of tomorrow. Also, if both these projects are allowed to continue too long then it will give America's international rivals time to erode away the still considerable technological lead in space technology that the US now enjoys.

These renowned veterans pointed out that SLS has especially increased our dependence on Russia for astronaut rides to the International Space Station. Some private companies have developed space exploration technologies for space missions in the recent years.



They have also claimed that the more times both these two technologically outmoded projects are allowed to flourish, the more they will potentially deny the nation's future economic and strategic advantages that leadership in human spaceflight has the potential to provide.

Despite all these warnings, there is no major push by reporters to highlight the scandal to the general public that will provide them a short-sighted action of what the politicians and bureaucrats are responsible for in this respect.

Many members of the NASA Advisory Council (NAC) have been openly expressing their views. Marcia S. Smith stated in an article for Space Policy Online quoted NAC sitting member Tom Young, who is former Director of NASA's Goddard Spaceflight Center, giving a blunt opinion of the inadequacy of NASA's roadmap for such manned deep space expeditions in these words, "We are collectively perpetrating a fraud".

- See more at: http://perfscience.com/content/214963-nasa-being-exempted-critical-investigation-major-news-media#sthash.boqqbZNU.dpuf
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 06:33 am
Strong stuff . . . thanks, EB.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 08:51 am
@Setanta,
so were back to shallow orbit construction of deep space probes and lift systems. Did we totally discount the elevator ? As I recll. Billy was dead set against this for personal reasons of wanting "Nuclear rockets" and that's bout where we left it.

Im still unconvinced bout any shortcomings of the elevator going into space to an orbital assembly area for ion propulsion engines.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Dec, 2014 01:23 pm
@farmerman,
The ion propulsion idea is a time whose idea has come, and is enjoying a cigarette. The Dawn mission, now nearly a decade old, sent a probe to Vesta, now considered the largest "asteroid" (because Ceres is now called a dwarf planet)--and will reach Ceres early this hear.

This is NASA's equipment page for the Dawn Mission.

Here's the home page for NASA's Dawn mission.

As i recall, Bill had a single source saying that a space elevator was impractical. After someone (you?) pointed out that he was quoting to only prominent critic of the idea, as i recall, he dropped out of the discussion.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Tue 6 Jan, 2015 02:23 am
HEADS UP: very long interesting piece on american manned flight in the current issue of Atlantic. I learned a lot about what it is like to live in space for an extended time, and came away thinking that we are not ready at all to attempt to go to mars. Not only might the humans not be physically fit enough to work on Mars, but they might be going blind too. Things we might want to nail down before we start spending money on the scheme.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/22/2019 at 10:50:48