Real-life modern day ship

[MechaThor]

We can't do a lot of things at this moment in time. Most of the stuff we're discussing could only happen decades from now, if ever. At this current point in time, not much is possible in terms of space travel.

Lets then hope that while we wait from them to make these interstellar space technologies they also invent something that allows us to live 100s of years longer (maybe clones? like the asgard... only without the loss of well.. you know!) That way we can actual see some of these cool things and not be dead or dying by the time they come out! I want to see it to belive it!

[Crazy Tom]

i see 2 ways for this spaceship 2 work.
1. cryo for people, and regenetarion of damaged tissue using some sort of nano medicine.
2. stick a hyperdrive on it(wich is a theoretical probably-not-going-to-work device) and use stasis chambers.

[Jarnin]

The Orion is ugly compared to the space shuttles. Going back to the Apollo-style modules.... :|

Form follows function. The shuttle was a congressional boondoggle that never lived up to expectations. Apollo exceeded expectations.

I don't care what it looks like. If it works as advertised, I'm happy to hand over my tax dollars to pay for the thing.


Guys (and gals?), lets stick to the topic at hand. This thread is dedicated to existing technology available now, not in 10 or 50 years. Money is not an issue.

That means no cryogenics, because that technology doesn't exist at present.

That means no genetic engineering the astronauts, because that technology doesn't exist at present.

In other words, if we don't have the capability, right now, then you can't use it.

[Crazy Tom]

NASA are a bunch of IDIOTS, thay managed to blow up the best contender for a next-gen SSTO vechicle, all because they didn't like it.

[Jarnin]

NASA are a bunch of IDIOTS, thay managed to blow up the best contender for a next-gen SSTO vechicle, all because they didn't like it.

Calling NASA, some of the best and brightest engineers and scientists in the USA, idiots, is just wrong on so many levels...

But what 'contender' are you referring to exactly?

[AvatarIII]

The Deep Freeze method poses too many problems. The long term affects on the human body are yet to be tested. There's the risk of "freezer burn" and the cells dying regardless of the cold and whatnot. If you think that freezing people for decades would keep them alive, then why aren't all those that freeze to death still alive? Cold is good at preserving things, but not keeping them alive. Unless there's some revolutions in that area, I just don't see it happening. Sorry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifreeze_protein

if someone were to develop a gene therapy to cause freeze tolerant humans, cryogenics would be dead simple, we already know the genes involved in this, and genetherapy can be done with current tech levels.

[ziga1980]

That means no cryogenics, because that technology doesn't exist at present.

That means no genetic engineering the astronauts, because that technology doesn't exist at present.

In other words, if we don't have the capability, right now, then you can't use it.

jeez man, where do you live? genetic engineering is POSSIBLE, it has been for some time. Also gene therapy and HUMAN CLONING is, guess what, POSSIBLE. it's just outlawed in most parts of the world because of RELIGION and POLITICS. now think again about our possibilities.

please have a nice day.

[SGFerrit]

Looking at most of the space agencies, (the ones that I could get budgets for)if they all came together there would be an annual budget of $29.8 Billion. Nasa is currently on $16.8bn, it's biggest 'competition' being ESA on $3.8 Billion a year.

That should go some way to building better space ships. It may not be personal generation ships, but if we pooled all of our money together we could greatly improve on what we have now.

[wolfax]

Money is no object is the maximum statement hear, because in reality 29.8 billion would not be enough at all. The research alone would cost billions, never mind the finished product.

[ziga1980]

Money is no object is the maximum statement hear, because in reality 29.8 billion would not be enough at all. The research alone would cost billions, never mind the finished product.

indeed. money would be the biggest problem.

[s09119]

Calling NASA, some of the best and brightest engineers and scientists in the USA, idiots, is just wrong on so many levels...

But what 'contender' are you referring to exactly?

Much as I value what NASA is trying to do (my aunt and uncle even worked for them for a while as scientific consults), I have to agree with him. They've simply ignored too many good ideas (spaceplanes? HELLO!?!?!?!?) and pushed forward with too many bad ones (ship + giant rocket (aka BOMB)) for me to respect them anymore.

Call me when they decide to use a plan that makes sense, and uses a more modern thinking (I mean, Apollo-style ships as next-gen? No... oh please, no).

[badpainter]

(I mean, Apollo-style ships as next-gen? No... oh please, no).

Apollo style ships are fine for nasa and what they’re planning to do near future. They are relying on the private sector to make what you have in mind, I think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifreeze_protein

Identifying genes does not identify the whole of their interaction or behavior, especially when both are subjective.

jeez man, where do you live?

Genetic engineering isn’t anywhere near viable. We can manipulate genes, sure, but that doesn’t mean we can ENGINEER stuff. We can correct some problems, but we cannot reliably create new properties. Not without creating side effects or unforeseen genetic diseases. This is the main reason genetic experimentation on humans is regulated - we're too ignorant.

A simple example is with dog breeding. Really low-tech engineering - brings out particular traits, and breeds in particular diseases. Genes used in multiple ways and acting in a symphony of DNA. An animal more complicated than any program or schematic that’s ever been comprehended, we haven’t done any engineering yet, just dabbling.

[SGFerrit]

Money is no object is the maximum statement hear, because in reality 29.8 billion would not be enough at all. The research alone would cost billions, never mind the finished product.

Hey, I'm just being realistic. Well saying realistic...

Basically, we are never going to have infinite money to spend on this stuff. NEVER.

However, it would be extremely hard to get all of the world's governments to pool their resources together. But it is a possibility, no matter if it is a small one.

Why not spend our time discussing something more feasible? This is all about stuff that is actually possible. And lets face it, a ship built with infinite money is not. A ship built with the money of the combined space agencies is.

I reckon if all the space-faring governments were to pool their resources together to built a proper spaceship, they would put their heart and soul into it. You can probably atleast double the $30bn figure.

The fact is, you NEED a budget on these things. Otherwise, it's just pointless wank IMO. Dream that will never be. Let's see something that is ACTUALLY doable...

[SGFerrit]

Much as I value what NASA is trying to do (my aunt and uncle even worked for them for a while as scientific consults), I have to agree with him. They've simply ignored too many good ideas (spaceplanes? HELLO!?!?!?!?) and pushed forward with too many bad ones (ship + giant rocket (aka BOMB)) for me to respect them anymore.

Call me when they decide to use a plan that makes sense, and uses a more modern thinking (I mean, Apollo-style ships as next-gen? No... oh please, no).

I think for the foreseeable future the most innovative space vehicles will be from the private sector. Space as an accessible industry is upon us. Also, it could be intersting watching the ESA in the coming years as they begin to develop the ACTS, their own manned vehicle. Maybe they could come up with something more innovative than NASA? I doubt it, but we can dream lol... I mean, the Orion is all fine and dandy, but it's basically reusing an old concept. The space shuttles are rendered pretty meaningless in my opinion, design wise anyway, it's a shame... I know they were flawed, but flaws are there to be overcome, not to set you back...

[Randy_Watson]

Apollo style ships are fine for nasa and what they’re planning to do near future. They are relying on the private sector to make what you have in mind, I think.

Exactly. The Apollo style ships still make more sense in every way. They are cheaper and more reliable. I know a lot of people who think the shuttle system is better because it "recycles" the ships, even though the cost of reusing a shuttle greatly exceeds that of just building new rockets.