Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Deep Space Industries to join the asteroid gold rush
Options
-
21-01-2013 3:12pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,827 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 89067
no one flies nickel across the atlanticbut what if launch costs keep falling, and all the hardware is used over and over again, and what if they mine more than just nickel
a boeing 747 will cost over 300 million to buy, and who knows how much to run and service, but I can fly accross the atlantic and back for less than 1000 euro
the same thing will happen with all types of space technology, its only a matter of time
running costs of a 747 ?
for long haul plan on using the planes weight of fuel
the rocket equation can be used to show that for escape from earths gravity well you are going to have to use a lot more fuel
lowest price I've seen for soyuz was 30 million , but they've gone up since they have a monopoly on manned launchers (apart from the Chinese)
Problem is that we haven't done reusable yet
given the time and costs to get a shuttle re-launched again salvageable would be a better world
The SRB's were essentially re-manufactured
SRB casings were recovered and reused many times. In one recent example, an SRB stiffener (lower) segment from STS-1 — which over a 30 year period flew six times plus one ground test
A device called a "hydrolaser," spraying water at 17,000 pounds per squares inch, strips insulation from the boosters as part of the refurbishment process.
NASA have two ships to recover the SRB's - so you have to wonder if there are any cost savings , compared to the savings you'd get with economies of scale with a proper production line
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Freedom_Star
Yes there are cheaper ways to orbit, but no one has invested significant resources into them. Rocketry will have a minimum cost. Which creates a viscious cycle - satellites could be a lot cheaper if it cost 1/10 the amount to launch them0 -
Advertisement
-
Scary. Getting worse by the day. Handing over control of more and more of the earth's resources to fewer and fewer people. So they
can devote it to their private whims.
Don't mean to drag the thread off topic but have to agree here
Another video uploaded by DSI after the conference shows a Q&A. About 11 minutes in one of the lads on the panel 'addresses' sharing and distributing the resources that'll be mined/obtained (apparently if they get the investment they're looking for they hope to beaming solar generated electricity down to earth by 2025). Just worrying that the people who'll be in control of all these resources reckoned that the best method of sharing resources throughout the earth is demonstrated everyday through the 'free enterprise system'.
In other words he meant "No, we're not going to distribute resources with everybody". Which is upsetting cause they really made themselves out to be doing the planet a favour in their conference.0 -
fewtinsoffroth wrote: »Don't mean to drag the thread off topic but have to agree here
Another video uploaded by DSI after the conference shows a Q&A. About 11 minutes in one of the lads on the panel 'addresses' sharing and distributing the resources that'll be mined/obtained (apparently if they get the investment they're looking for they hope to beaming solar generated electricity down to earth by 2025). Just worrying that the people who'll be in control of all these resources reckoned that the best method of sharing resources throughout the earth is demonstrated everyday through the 'free enterprise system'.
In other words he meant "No, we're not going to distribute resources with everybody". Which is upsetting cause they really made themselves out to be doing the planet a favour in their conference.
It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self interest.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Capt'n Midnight wrote: »no one flies nickel across the atlantic
running costs of a 747 ?
for long haul plan on using the planes weight of fuel
the rocket equation can be used to show that for escape from earths gravity well you are going to have to use a lot more fuel
lowest price I've seen for soyuz was 30 million , but they've gone up since they have a monopoly on manned launchers (apart from the Chinese)
Problem is that we haven't done reusable yet
given the time and costs to get a shuttle re-launched again salvageable would be a better world
The SRB's were essentially re-manufactured
SRB casings were recovered and reused many times. In one recent example, an SRB stiffener (lower) segment from STS-1 — which over a 30 year period flew six times plus one ground testA device called a "hydrolaser," spraying water at 17,000 pounds per squares inch, strips insulation from the boosters as part of the refurbishment process.
NASA have two ships to recover the SRB's - so you have to wonder if there are any cost savings , compared to the savings you'd get with economies of scale with a proper production line
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Freedom_Star
Yes there are cheaper ways to orbit, but no one has invested significant resources into them. Rocketry will have a minimum cost. Which creates a viscious cycle - satellites could be a lot cheaper if it cost 1/10 the amount to launch them
the reason I used the example of a 747 is because it is a good example of a reuseable transport that cost millions to build and service, but it is used every day by average people like me, this is what needs to happen with rockets
the space shuttle is the exact opposite of a 747, it failed at being reuseable
right now spaceX, blue orgin, and skylon are working on making space flight a cheap every day low cost business, I think they all have a good chance of success, but I think spaceX are ahead of the pack for now but that could change
once all the hardware is reuseable then the costs will drop and Mars and the Moon will be easy to reach0
Advertisement