space race

posts about #spacerace more →
Warp Drive Could Suck Our Entire Planet Into A Black Hole
Vote to Make Serenity Into a Real Space Vessel!
China Lands on the Moon - Sort of
India’s First Lunar Mission Proves a Smashing Success
Behold The Future Of Space Exploration — An Asian Space Race
Cool and Crap Awards of the Week
The Cartoon that Introduced Sputnik to America, 1957
Happy Soviets Dance on the Moon, 1961
The U.S. Needs A Space Race With China
Nationalist Robots Swarm To Conquer Space

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

KhaiJB
06/12/09

In reply to Warp Drive Could Suck Our Entire Planet Into A Black Hole
this is why we take the drive outside the solar system before trying it.

says that page 1 of the manual here....
Reply

KhaiJB was starred KhaiJB was unstarred

Meirelle
03/05/09

In reply to Vote to Make Serenity Into a Real Space Vessel!
I don't know. I think I might have to vote Colbert on this one. :)
Reply

Meirelle was starred Meirelle was unstarred

twophrasebark
03/05/09

In reply to Vote to Make Serenity Into a Real Space Vessel!
What was wrong with NASA's original name "Node 3 Connecting Module with Pressurized Mating Adapter-3 (PMA-3) Attached to Axial Port 3JGF-384189242826456212264764W"
Reply

twophrasebark was starred twophrasebark was unstarred

Grey_Area
03/05/09

In reply to Vote to Make Serenity Into a Real Space Vessel!
I'm voting "Kodos".
Reply

Grey_Area was starred Grey_Area was unstarred

twDarkflame
03/05/09

In reply to Vote to Make Serenity Into a Real Space Vessel!
I think this is a missed optunity myself.

Auction the name of to the group that raise's the most for charity.
Reply

twDarkflame was starred twDarkflame was unstarred

twophrasebark
03/05/09

Wow. Smart.

How about auction the name to the group that raises the most for... NASA.

Or split it with a charity. Charities are good.
Reply

twophrasebark was starred twophrasebark was unstarred

tetracycloide
03/05/09

In reply to Vote to Make Serenity Into a Real Space Vessel!
i'm going to have to go with colbert given the two alternatives. if xenu wins we might see an anacdote in the in the mainstream media reguarding the name; if serenity wins we'll probably never hear about this again from anyone outside of NASA; and if colbert wins it will almost surely come up on his show and during his interviews. in my minds eye the results of colbert winning is much more entertaining for me than any other outcome.
Reply

tetracycloide was starred tetracycloide was unstarred

ParJoe
03/05/09

In reply to Vote to Make Serenity Into a Real Space Vessel!
I'm glad you posted this. I keep forgetting to vote.

As much as I like Colbert...he's a flipping political comedian. In no way should his name be on a space capsule.
Reply

ParJoe was starred ParJoe was unstarred

tetracycloide
03/05/09

@ParJoe: this sentiment makes sense outside of the context of the situation but within it begins to falter once you consider the two proposed alternatives: a factious evil alien and a factious spaceship. in that field a 'flipping political comedian' appears to fit right in.
Reply

tetracycloide was starred tetracycloide was unstarred

Jamal Dominic Barr
03/05/09

In reply to Vote to Make Serenity Into a Real Space Vessel!
Though I have complete and total contempt for Joss Whedon, Serenity by far is one of the greatest movies of all time, maybe it is the greatest movie of all time, and if you disagree with me on that poignant observation; you can go to hell. I'm voting SERENITY.
Reply

Jamal Dominic Barr was starred

tetracycloide
03/05/09

@Jamal Dominic Barr: judging from this characterization of your stance on dissident viewpoints it sounds like the first statement can be simplified to 'i have complete and total contempt for everyone.'
Reply

tetracycloide was starred tetracycloide was unstarred

ZanipoloLebron
03/03/09

In reply to China Lands on the Moon - Sort of
Yay! now Iran will be able to orbit a Nuclear Bomb Factory and pick off its enemies from Space.

I do however laugh at the suggestion that being able to dock with another craft "in space" is a vital step to Lunar Ambitions. Not if you are Going one Way...

Title: Colonizing the Moon

Description: The one way transfer of ten million colonists to the Moon over a two hundred year period. This requires the launch of single stage Vehicles that will also function as Landers and Habitats. These Launchers will have capacity of storage to provide the Colonists with Two Years of Food and the Hydroponic and Aquaculture Capacity to produce Food into the future not only sufficient to sustain the colony, but to cope with growth in Population.

CAPACITY OF LAUNCHER
10,000,000 colonists/200 years=50,000 colonists/year
50,000 colonists/365 days=137 colonists per day
137 colonists/24 Launch vehicles/day=6 Colonists/Launcher

• LAUNCHER COLONIST CAPACITY (6)
• ERRORLESS LAUNCH RATE (24 LAUNCH VEHICLES/DAY)

ALLOCATION OF LAUNCHERS
24 launchers/day x 365 days x 200 years=1,762,000 Launchers
10,000,000 colonists/6 colonists = 1,666,667 Launchers
1,762,000-1,666,667 = 95,333 Surplus Launchers

• PASSENGER CARRYING LAUNCHERS (1,666,667)
• RESUPPLY/SPECIALIST CARGO LAUNCHERS (95,333)

COST
$100,000,000,000/Launcher x 1,762,000 Launchers = $176.2x 10^15

• ANNUAL COST ($811 x 10^12)
• TOTAL COST ($176.2x 10^15)
Reply

ZanipoloLebron was starred ZanipoloLebron was unstarred

Andrew Liptak
03/04/09

@ZanipoloLebron: No, it is vital, because of the nature of how we land on the moon. Early on, engineers realized that it was impractical to land the entire spaceship on the surface, hence the LEM, which detached and landed from the CM. In order to do this, it had to be docked shortly after launch, and it had to redock once they came up from the moon. I don't see this changing, because of the nature of space travel - the less mass you have to launch from a surface, the better.

We're unlikely to ever have to go one-way to the moon - not in the near future, anyway. Maybe at some point, but we don't have the facilities or experience to live long-term on the moon, and even then, I don't see people living there for a long time.

Colonization is an admirable step, but there's a lot to do inbetween here and there.
Reply

Andrew Liptak was starred Andrew Liptak was unstarred

ThisDudeRufus
03/03/09

In reply to China Lands on the Moon - Sort of
Riiiiight. 'Planned' crash. Just like their 'planned' shooting down of a satellite last year.

I'm watching you, China.
Reply

ThisDudeRufus was starred ThisDudeRufus was unstarred

phoenix
03/03/09

@ThisDudeRufus: Are they on notice? :D
Reply

phoenix was starred phoenix was unstarred

Johnny Dactyl
03/03/09

In reply to China Lands on the Moon - Sort of
Why do they crash everything instead of sending it into the sun? Free garbage collection
Reply

Johnny Dactyl was starred Johnny Dactyl was unstarred

I Think We're Property
03/03/09

@Finstern: That would actually take more fuel. The Sun represents a nice big gravity well, sure, but getting there still means making escape velocity from the local gravity well- both Luna, and the Earth/Luna system.
Reply

Andrew Liptak
03/03/09

@I Think We're Property: Yeah, it takes a lot to get to the moon, but it takes even more to get to the sun. I imagine that it was the easiest way to get rid of this, because the impact would completely destroy it.
Reply

Andrew Liptak was starred Andrew Liptak was unstarred

Johnny Dactyl
03/03/09

@I Think We're Property:

@Andrew Liptak:

O_o ok to get to the moon you need fuel to navigate and slow down and stuff. There is almost no friction in space, just gravity so sending something into the sun should take just as much fuel as sending something into the moon, we are not in any hurry here. The object is to destroy it and I think the moon is much less cooler to blow something up than anything else that could take this out on its way to the sun.

Please inform me if I'm wrong, I'm just a geek, not a nerd.
Reply

Johnny Dactyl was starred Johnny Dactyl was unstarred

Gann
03/03/09

@Finstern: Sending it to the sun would do effectively the same thing, but this way they have the prestige of having sent something to the moon.
Reply

Gann was starred Gann was unstarred

Andrew Liptak
03/03/09

@Finstern: It would also take quite a bit of fuel to get out of a lunar orbit. There's really no need for them to do that, and carrying extra just to dump something in the sun isn't the best use of their resources when it comes to heavy lifting out of earth's gravity.
Reply

Andrew Liptak was starred Andrew Liptak was unstarred

Andrew Liptak
03/03/09

@Finstern: Just an adendum, the point of the mission was mapping, not to blow something up on the lunar surface - crashing it into the moon gives them the added effect of putting something there - something they're following up on.
Reply

Andrew Liptak was starred Andrew Liptak was unstarred

RAHfanboy
11/15/08

In reply to India’s First Lunar Mission Proves a Smashing Success
Three words you don't often hear together: Successful, crash, and dive.
Reply

RAHfanboy was starred RAHfanboy was unstarred

hofmann
11/14/08

In reply to India’s First Lunar Mission Proves a Smashing Success
I love how there's a shuttle flight in an hour and there was nothing on the site about it today. It's awesome that India was able to do this, but we should really give some props to the crew of STS-126.
Reply

hofmann was starred hofmann was unstarred

icelight
11/14/08

@hofmann: Seriously. I just watched it take off on NASA TV, but for all the outside coverage, you'd think the only think happening today was someone sweeping the steps of KSC. At least another mention of the pee-recycling machine should be in order.
Reply

icelight was starred icelight was unstarred

Meirelle
11/14/08

@icelight: Actually, it's the headline article on CNN.com right now.

[www.cnn.com]
Reply

Meirelle was starred Meirelle was unstarred

kevinyung89
11/14/08

In reply to India’s First Lunar Mission Proves a Smashing Success
Why call it a "suicide nosedive"? It's not like it's going to bring that much excitement into it.

Maybe they call it that so when they fail, they can say "we planned on it".
Reply

kevinyung89 was starred kevinyung89 was unstarred

Purple Dave
11/14/08

@kevinyung89:
I was actually thinking that it would be a good idea for all nations that are planning to enter the space race to start off with a mission that's designed to produce a crash or an explosion or something. That way they have a much greater chance of success!
Reply

Purple Dave was starred Purple Dave was unstarred

RAHfanboy
11/15/08

@Purple Dave: Yeah, if you can't hit the ground you've got real problems.
Reply

RAHfanboy was starred RAHfanboy was unstarred

Meirelle
11/14/08

In reply to India’s First Lunar Mission Proves a Smashing Success
Good. This world needs a new space race.
Reply

Meirelle was starred Meirelle was unstarred

Gann
11/14/08

@meirelle, Commander Closet Commie: Agreed. Competition between India and China promises to drastically reduce the cost of space travel.
Reply

Gann was starred Gann was unstarred

Earlier threads | All threads | Show hidden threads | Show featured threads only | Start a new discussion

SUBSCRIBE TO io9

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment