but yes, theoretically 39 days is possible
Science Travel to Mars, in 39 days, compared to a 6 months trip.
|
|
 Oct 28 2009, 12:54 AM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
 
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005 
|
putting the cart before the horse. find a way to bring/construct the spacecraft to orbit, then we'll talk about propulsion system
but yes, theoretically 39 days is possible |
Quote|
|
|
|
|
Oct 28 2009, 01:56 AM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005
|
QUOTE(joyyy @ Oct 28 2009, 01:13 AM) It can always be piggy-backed on a shuttle or can be launched and assembled in stages. The engine won't be large, the space is needed for human ergonomics. compare with the time/energy/effort/cost of assembling the ISS (which is still technically not complete as new module/equipment is still going up.  |
|
|
Oct 28 2009, 08:37 AM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005
|
QUOTE(azarimy @ Oct 28 2009, 02:20 AM) what? when this engine is only capable of running on highway, you must 1st figure out how to get the car to the highway. otherwise the car with new engine will only stay in your garagefirst u must have the engine, then u figure out where to build the car. no point having a factory when u dont even have an engine. |
|
|
Oct 28 2009, 10:51 PM
Return to original view | Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005
|
QUOTE(azarimy @ Oct 28 2009, 09:04 AM) so u're saying that even if u dont have the engine, we should figure out how to get a non-existing object on the highway first? merely pointing out that without a viable method of constructing/transporting spaceships to orbits, achievement such as these, while wonderful in their own rights, should not result in us going "booyah! interplanetary/interstellar travel on the horizon!"by the way, u're talking about a problem that already has a solution. that's what the multi-staged thrusters are for. it's just not as efficient as ion engine, but it still solves the problem. |
|
|
Oct 29 2009, 02:29 AM
Return to original view | Post
#5
|
|
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005
|
QUOTE(joyyy @ Oct 29 2009, 01:00 AM) The problem now is that we DO have viable methods of transporting vehicles into space. And now we're not talking about whether interplanetary commute being on the horizon. We're talking about the claim that commuting to Mars is possible within 39 days using ion thrusters. space shuttle is due to be retired. apollo type rocket info was lost (shocking). new class of cheap earth/space transport method is currently in development but has hit numerous problems. the largest space nation (USA) is getting less and less space-capable.ion thrusters capable of 39day trip does not mean 39day trip is possible with current technology |
|
|
Oct 30 2009, 12:35 AM
Return to original view | Post
#6
|
|
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005
|
QUOTE(azarimy @ Oct 29 2009, 07:00 AM) china is surpassing the USA in the current space race. they're more than able to land humans on the moon, as well as sending the first manned trip to mars. japan, korea and ESA is close behind them. india and pakistan is also ready to join the race. 1. i'll believe it when i see it. (china to moon/mars)so NASA might not be able. but others still can. it doesnt matter if 39day is possible or not TODAY. that's not the issue. when humans first discovered flight, they didnt stop knowing that they would never break the sound barrier until 50 years later, right? 2. no objections there. later rather than sooner though Added on October 30, 2009, 12:43 am QUOTE(joyyy @ Oct 29 2009, 11:13 AM) The world does not revolve around the US. no arguments. just discussion. Although NASA has encountered a lot of problems in recent times, the Europeans launches are getting more and more reliable, with more and more private companies joining in the business. And the only way private companies can complete with national government-backed space bodies is to constantly come up with innovative and reliable methods of launching rockets into space, which solves your problem of first getting the spacecraft into orbit, just in case you forgot what your argument was about. the current space exploration environment does still revolve around NASA. who else do you think got all those private venture to develop space tech? CERN? as of today, there is no reliable way of getting large objects into orbit other than with the shuttle. other countries are only launching satellites and capsules. capsule is fine for trip to moon. but for longer distance/time period, large vehicle and more living space is needed. to recap my points. yes, 39 days trip to mars maybe possible by calculations and simulation. but a more current issue of getting such a craft to orbit need to be solved before anything practical can be tested. otherwise its only academic even if you can come up a 7 day travel period, because for all practical purpose, you are still stuck on earth. its a wonderful discovery but looking at the larger picture, today, that discovery dont mean much. This post has been edited by lin00b: Oct 30 2009, 12:43 AM |
| Change to: |  0.0133sec
 0.57
 6 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 25th November 2025 - 06:26 AM |
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025 IPS, Inc.