Quote from: TakeOff on 10/09/2017 07:21 amQuote from: A_M_Swallow on 02/25/2012 10:15 pmBy the end of December 2017:c. People lobbying to get an EML-1/2 spacestation (so Orion has a destination).What a great prediction! You foresaw the Deep Space Gateway, the lobbying for which has really has to be taken seriously now.It is the more impressive since the DSG is so totally meaningless and bad in every respect, that I couldn't believe it or even understand that it was a real proposal the first times I heard of it, I could never have made that thing up. No one has ever suggested a cis-Lunar space station as the first step to interplanetary HSF. But you seem to know the game. You realized that the Orion and SLS need to look useful and the DSG is perfect for that, so it was a political necessity already 5 years ago, although not much talked about in public until this year or last AFAIK. (Though, someone gave me hope by saying that it is a left over from the former administration and won't fly.)A reusable lunar lander has to be garaged somewhere between missions. Putting a heat shield on a mass critical lunar lander is silly so it cannot return to Earth. The options are low lunar orbit (LLO), Lagrange point or LEO. The Orion has difficulties performing the Earth to LLO return trip but can reach the Lagrange points.Delta-v Spacestation to lunar surface in km/sSpacestationSingleReturnLLO1.873.74Lagrange2.825.64LEO5.9311.86
Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 02/25/2012 10:15 pmBy the end of December 2017:c. People lobbying to get an EML-1/2 spacestation (so Orion has a destination).What a great prediction! You foresaw the Deep Space Gateway, the lobbying for which has really has to be taken seriously now.It is the more impressive since the DSG is so totally meaningless and bad in every respect, that I couldn't believe it or even understand that it was a real proposal the first times I heard of it, I could never have made that thing up. No one has ever suggested a cis-Lunar space station as the first step to interplanetary HSF. But you seem to know the game. You realized that the Orion and SLS need to look useful and the DSG is perfect for that, so it was a political necessity already 5 years ago, although not much talked about in public until this year or last AFAIK. (Though, someone gave me hope by saying that it is a left over from the former administration and won't fly.)
By the end of December 2017:c. People lobbying to get an EML-1/2 spacestation (so Orion has a destination).
Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 10/09/2017 08:55 amQuote from: TakeOff on 10/09/2017 07:21 amQuote from: A_M_Swallow on 02/25/2012 10:15 pmBy the end of December 2017:c. People lobbying to get an EML-1/2 spacestation (so Orion has a destination).What a great prediction! You foresaw the Deep Space Gateway, the lobbying for which has really has to be taken seriously now.It is the more impressive since the DSG is so totally meaningless and bad in every respect, that I couldn't believe it or even understand that it was a real proposal the first times I heard of it, I could never have made that thing up. No one has ever suggested a cis-Lunar space station as the first step to interplanetary HSF. But you seem to know the game. You realized that the Orion and SLS need to look useful and the DSG is perfect for that, so it was a political necessity already 5 years ago, although not much talked about in public until this year or last AFAIK. (Though, someone gave me hope by saying that it is a left over from the former administration and won't fly.)A reusable lunar lander has to be garaged somewhere between missions. Putting a heat shield on a mass critical lunar lander is silly so it cannot return to Earth. The options are low lunar orbit (LLO), Lagrange point or LEO. The Orion has difficulties performing the Earth to LLO return trip but can reach the Lagrange points.Delta-v Spacestation to lunar surface in km/sSpacestationSingleReturnLLO1.873.74Lagrange2.825.64LEO5.9311.86Why use a reusable Lunar lander when not using a reusable Earth lander, although they are available already a decade or so before the DSG? And is a Lunar surface mission part of the DSG? How would that work given the costs of launching SLS and Orion to the DSG once a year? The crew can only stay there for a few weeks a year, right? So it cannot replace the ISS. This makes for three big HSF missions for NASA to finance simultaneously: ISS, DSG and a Lunar surface mission. That won't happen.I thought you predicted the DSG because you're politically savvy.
Note: Sending a black woman on the third manned landing should make headlines around the world.
"Well... it's certainly not as silly as going all the way to Mars to operate rovers on the surface in real time from orbit - yes, this has been suggested, and the idea has been borrowed for the deep space gateway (which makes no sense at all)."Apollo 10 - style rehearsal mission spends time at Mars doing that teleoperation, getting some valuable science without doing a human Mars landing on the first mission. Next mission - go to the surface. That's not silly, it makes very good sense. Now do the same at the Moon as one step to human moon landings and as a rehearsal of what will happen at Mars. It's sense all the way. Much more sensible than going full up from ISS to human Mars landings in one step. Now THAT's silly!
Well, that was all very predictable! Now we need predictions for 2018!
Quote from: woods170 on 02/27/2012 08:23 amQuote from: neilh on 02/27/2012 12:40 amWow, this is one of the most depressing threads I've seen in a while.Wow, this is one of the most pointless threads I've seen in a while.I'd go further, but I'd have to ban myself
Quote from: neilh on 02/27/2012 12:40 amWow, this is one of the most depressing threads I've seen in a while.Wow, this is one of the most pointless threads I've seen in a while.
Wow, this is one of the most depressing threads I've seen in a while.
Plus now AI is much more advanced than it used to be, and is in a much better position to meet the demands of semi-autonomy for time-delays in lunar operations.
This thread is a kick to go back and read. I think it is interesting that no one predicted that SpaceX would both fail more (2 RUD's) and succeed more (17 booster recoveries, heading to 20 flights this year), nor that we would still be waiting for Falcon Heavy.
Quote from: baddux on 02/25/2012 05:05 pm- Falcon Heavy, how many flights has it flown?Nearing completion and perhaps will have a test flight in the next year or so... if things hold.
- Falcon Heavy, how many flights has it flown?