home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.space.tech      Technical and general issues related to      3,113 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 1,297 of 3,113   
   Ool to Ross A. Finlayson   
   Re: Moon Base baby steps   
   25 Jan 04 06:40:27   
   
   XPost: sci.space.policy   
   From: ulrich.schreglmann@t-online.de   
      
   "Ross A. Finlayson"  wrote in message news:   
   c6b9c1e.0401231956.4e2d9287@posting.google.com...   
      
   > Geosynchronous orbit is much farther away than low Earth orbit, some   
   > 22,000 miles or something.   
      
   36,000km.   
      
   > Then, let's see, I think the moon is   
   > 600,000 (500-700) kilometers away,   
      
   384,400km.   
      
   > and Mars variously 20 million to   
   > 200 million.   
      
   54,511,000km to 401,356,000km.   
      
   > I was reading about the Shuttle-C for cargo and saving the liquid fuel   
   > tanks in holding orbits, I think that's a good idea.   
      
   It would be an even better idea if that fuel could be supplied from   
   them Moon, from where it's much, MUCH cheaper to launch.  Only build-   
   ing an industry mining oxygen on the Moon may be hard.  The Moon's   
   mass is 46% oxygen but extreme temperatures and/or chemical procedures   
   have to be applied to release it.  Focusing solar power to cause the   
   temperatures can be achieved, but materials containing the ovens are a   
   tough nut to crack.  As for the chemicals, keeping them in a recycling   
   loop is the tough part, because you couldn't get them on the Moon it-   
   self.   
      
   > What prevents   
   > the addition of new modules to the ISS, Freedom, the International   
   > Space Station, every year?  What's so great about the ISS's orbit that   
   > it is there?   
      
   The lower, the cheaper, especially if you want to add a lot of mass.   
   You launch it just high enough so it's safe from air friction.  No   
   one's had any ambition in the last thirty years to go any higher up   
   into space than they absolutely had to.  That was 550km for people and   
   36,000km for TV and radio satellites.   
      
   Compare that to the distances above!  But it's not quite as bad as it   
   looks, considering gravity diminishes squared with distance.  It's   
   not as if there's ten times more energy needed for the Moon than for   
   GEO.  You're actually half the way there when you're in GEO, energy-   
   wise.   
      
      
   --   
     __   "A good leader knows when it's best to ignore the          __   
   ('__`>       screams for help and focus on the bigger picture." <'__`)   
   //6(6; İOOL mmiv                                                :^)^\\   
   `\_-/  http://home.t-online.de/home/ulrich.schreglmann/redbaron  \-_/'   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca