And another thing, Space Shuttle Columbia is now the only Space Shuttle at Kennedy Space Center.
|
|
Quote:
Now that's a hell of a read. The first one is nuts. |
I refuse to go on Cracked, everytime I do 3 hours disappear.
So, question, Overflow, what's your take on reusable space vehicles? Do you think they are the way to go or going back to rockets is more preferable? It seems that maneuverability is expanded with the Orbiter and type vehicles, but cost is expensive. Although if it could land at any runway similar tot he failed Russian attempt at it could help. Just poking your brain. |
I found this site tonight. Couldnt get away from the crap. Literally quivering my knees having to pee so badly. Like I need something else to be obsessive about.
Waiting on js response :D |
Meant to quote you Eric :D
|
I spend hours on Cracked. My brain's so full of completely useless knowledge from that site it's not even funny.
|
Oh yeah the website is amazing with useless information. But every time I open a new page it links me to 3 or 4 things I think are awesome, it's a never ending cycle so I just refuse to go to that website.
|
i'll be honest... that site is how i burn quite a bit of downtime at work... probably too much time.
|
Quote:
I personally favor reusable spacecrafts like the orbiters. I feel like people connect to reusable vehicles because they begin to develop their own personalities. Did the Space Shuttles cost a fortune? Heck yes. Do reusable vehicles have the potential to be cheaper than nonreusable vehicles? Completely. I don't think it's far to use the Space Shuttle as a definition for all reusable spacecraft because in reality, the Space Shuttle was only partially reusable. The Space Shuttle wasn't exactly maneuverable because it couldn't leave LEO because of it's wings and rear stabilizers. So I do favor reusablility, but I think we need to sharpen our technology and materials before going reusable again. |
I seriously hope we see another reusable spacecraft in our lifetimes. Nothing else will compare to the shuttles until that goal is achieved.
One of things I love about the Halo games is that a lot of the technology they have set in the future seems completely feasible. Like the Pelican for example. I can totally see technology progressing to the point where we have aircraft that can achieve orbit without the use of rocket boosters. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__...ch-pelican.jpg And Jordan brings up a good topic. Maneuverability in space is going to be key for reusable spacecraft in the future. The shuttles could do some stuff (like the backflip maneuver posted earlier) but not much. |
Quote:
While attending the National Flight Academy I spoke to several retired Air Force officers who swore upon the existence of "out of this world" technology. One who was stationed at Maxwell AFB spoke technology similar to this that used anti gravity and electromagnetic propulsion. These men are not the type to be dishonest; I fully trust their stories. Physics as we know it is not written in stone. I will promise you that. Ive seen it myself. |
I think that anti-gravity or being able to harness it to create a gravity field is the pinnacle of propulsion. There would really be no reason to replace it, although planes are inherently limited by the pilot, it's only a few years until we see more and more remotely piloted vehicles. It overall just makes sense, take the risk, enhance the performance to the structural limits of the vehicle, not the person.
I think solar is the next boom efficiency is the main problem with it now. A bit of a tangent, but then again everytime humans have tried to forecast the future we're way off with expectations both ways. We think too much into what we have now, and not enough into what doesn't exist yet. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:57 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.