Quote from: daidalos on August 21, 2014, 04:59:12 PM
Thats wholly untrue T-bone. The U.S. with it's "Deep Impact" mission has already been to a comet. Slamming a probe into one in fact just to see if we could "move" it at all.

In fact that mission did some of the science behind the next comet/asteroid mission.

Which is going to be NASA claims, to "capture" one and put it into geo-sync orbit out near the moon.

Which I personally think is a bad idea. Mankind doesn't know enough yet about the cosmos to start trying to monkey around with, and move celestial bodies around in our solar system.

I mean what happens if in the course of "capturing" one they cause it to slam into Earth instead by accident?

"Oh our bad, sorry your city (County, state, nation depending on how large the rock is and what it's made of) was wiped out along with millions of folks who lived there".....I mean it's not exactly as if there haven't been "mistakes" and "accidents" in space exploration before.

Besides, whats the benefit to us of going to comets and asteroids?

Can we colonize them? NO

Can we obtain resources there such as coal or oil?

NO

The only thing of use on one besides the water/ice.

Are the metals like Gold, Silver, Platinum, Iron, Nickel etc.... And mining them for those, will NOT benefit the common folks one wit or iota.

In fact if anything all it will serve to do is create more economic turmoil.

For example, just imagine if suddenly we wake up one morning and the price of Gold or Silver or Platinum goes through the floor on the world markets because someone's found, and brought bace tons of these metals, from a chunk of Gold or Silver out there the size of Mt. Mckinley?

Hell we've already found a Diamond out there the size of a planet.

Whats it do the the economy if suddenly we can mine it too?

Suddenly entire national economies are in the toilet because their currencies are backed by Gold, Silver, and other "rare" minerals found here on Earth in limited quantities.

Which are no longer rare, or limited in quantity.

This mission like "Deep Impact" (which at least was attempting to research defending the planet against impact) is nothing but the waste of taxpayer money's to fund research into something which has zero benefit for the human race as a whole.

And which only benefits a small fraction of the populace.

One day last week, my neighbor placed a cantaloupe on a cinderblock at our neighborhood firing range. I put a Hornady 52-grain hollow-point boattail match bullet through the center of it at around 3,200 fps, and got to watch the melon guts spray all over the place. It was fun as hell, but the experience did not leave me with a feeling that I had visited the cantaloupe, or become close to it in any way.

They did it... about 5-minutes ago...  Congrats again, guys.

Rosetta bounced correctively, instantaneously firing landing harpoons which screwed-into the Comet-surface, firmly securing itself in-place.  What an amazing engineering feat.

It's currently 'talking' to mission-control on a 30-minute telemetry-delay.  Looks like they're 'un-boxing' the camera-apparatus now... 

Quote from: kit saginaw on November 12, 2014, 08:23:09 AM
They did it... about 5-minutes ago...  Congrats again, guys.

Rosetta bounced correctively, instantaneously firing landing harpoons which screwed-into the Comet-surface, firmly securing itself in-place.  What an amazing engineering feat.

It's currently 'talking' to mission-control on a 30-minute telemetry-delay.  Looks like they're 'un-boxing' the camera-apparatus now...

Excellent! I love unlocking questions man has been asking since first pondering the heavens.

It's amazing to think that in just over 100 years man has gone from learning to fly to being able to put a machine on a pristine frozen ball that's been circling our solar system for roughly 4.56 Billion years, and return scientific data back to Earth. We've come a long way. I suspect this mission will answer  lot of questions about the formation of solid objects in stellar nebulas, as well as other questions about the early solar system that we still don't have answers to.

Quote from: Skeptic on November 13, 2014, 06:25:19 PM
It's amazing to think that in just over 100 years man has gone from learning to fly to being able to put a machine on a pristine frozen ball that's been circling our solar system for roughly 4.56 Billion years, and return scientific data back to Earth. We've come a long way. I suspect this mission will answer  lot of questions about the formation of solid objects in stellar nebulas, as well as other questions about the early solar system that we still don't have answers to.

I've often thought that the advances in the field of flight have been breathtaking. Moving from the first sustained powered flight in 1903 to machines of war just 11 years later, though they were featherweight concoctions of wood and wire and fabric that flew at barely over 100 mph, and often as not shot machine guns through the arc of the wooden propeller. In 1927 one man flew a plane across the Atlantic Ocean, nonstop and alone. Ten years later, a German pilot flew over 400 mph in sustained level flight. Just a few years after that, a British engineer created the first jet engine, and a few years more saw the launch of the first rocket-powered ballistic missile. Mach 1 in a manned aircraft broken in 1947. Mach 4, 5, and 6 flights just ten years later in the X-15. Then space.

In less than 60 years, from first powered flight to space travel. Wow.

Quote from: daidalos on August 21, 2014, 04:59:12 PM
Thats wholly untrue T-bone. The U.S. with it's "Deep Impact" mission has already been to a comet. Slamming a probe into one in fact just to see if we could "move" it at all.

In fact that mission did some of the science behind the next comet/asteroid mission.

Which is going to be NASA claims, to "capture" one and put it into geo-sync orbit out near the moon.

Which I personally think is a bad idea. Mankind doesn't know enough yet about the cosmos to start trying to monkey around with, and move celestial bodies around in our solar system.

I mean what happens if in the course of "capturing" one they cause it to slam into Earth instead by accident?

"Oh our bad, sorry your city (County, state, nation depending on how large the rock is and what it's made of) was wiped out along with millions of folks who lived there".....I mean it's not exactly as if there haven't been "mistakes" and "accidents" in space exploration before.

Besides, whats the benefit to us of going to comets and asteroids?

Can we colonize them? NO

Can we obtain resources there such as coal or oil?

NO

The only thing of use on one besides the water/ice.

Are the metals like Gold, Silver, Platinum, Iron, Nickel etc.... And mining them for those, will NOT benefit the common folks one wit or iota.

In fact if anything all it will serve to do is create more economic turmoil.

For example, just imagine if suddenly we wake up one morning and the price of Gold or Silver or Platinum goes through the floor on the world markets because someone's found, and brought bace tons of these metals, from a chunk of Gold or Silver out there the size of Mt. Mckinley?

Hell we've already found a Diamond out there the size of a planet.

Whats it do the the economy if suddenly we can mine it too?

Suddenly entire national economies are in the toilet because their currencies are backed by Gold, Silver, and other "rare" minerals found here on Earth in limited quantities.

Which are no longer rare, or limited in quantity.

This mission like "Deep Impact" (which at least was attempting to research defending the planet against impact) is nothing but the waste of taxpayer money's to fund research into something which has zero benefit for the human race as a whole.

And which only benefits a small fraction of the populace.

The asteroid to be captured will only be a number of feet in length and width, purposely chosen so that in the unlikely event it crashed to earth, it would burn up in the atmosphere.

You never know what kind of spin off tech the space program will produce. The technology to create and enhance pictures of the moon went on to improve other neat inventions like CT scanners and MRIs. Also solar cells and water filtration tech was greatly advanced by NASA.

The truth is, it's silly to ask "whats something useful this mission will discover? What will we learn from it?"

If we knew what we would learn, we wouldn't have to run the mission.

We are seeking out those "unknown unknowns" things we don't even realize we don't know.

If humans survive long enough, we will have to redirect a comet or asteroid one day. It'd be nice if we had run a few similar missions before it became absolutely necessary.

I'd hate to go the way of the dinosaur because some people didn't think our space program was worth the 0.5% of the yearly budget it receives.

Just want to add one thing.

What was the point of sending a dog into space? What was the point of sending a tin can satellite that beeped back at us?

The average citizen received no benefit from those type things. However, learning how to put satellites in space lead to many useful things such as GPS, weather satellites, spy satellites, and better communication across the world.

These things would have seemed fantastical to people of the 50's and 60's. In that regard, this mission could be the first step of many other fantastic things. A comet could serve as an automated refueling station for example.

Just as it was hard to imagine GPS, because the computer technology was lacking at the time. It may be hard to imagine benefits from comets. What if 50 years from now, we have an increase in 3d printing on par with what we experienced with computers?

Suddenly you can send robots to a comet to set up 3d printing machines. Comets have gold, platinum, iron, rock, and several other metals. Interesting. A ship could be assembled autonomously. No need to lift everything into low earth orbit. The fuel could be made from the water that is present. Solar cells can provide the power for electrolysis. Split the water into hydrogen and oxygen, a fuel and an accelerant.

If NASA parks an asteroid or two and we find out that it/they contain precious metals, your first problem is mining and refining in space, to maximize the profit of bringing down that much ore (or whatever). Chopping the asteroid into big chunks wastes resources when you can clean out what you don't need and just ship the good stuff.

So it won't affect world markets unless and until it is on Earth. So much for economic alarmism.

But back to Step J above, where that mining and refining in space gets done, for without all that a permanent Moon base (and beyond) is financially impossible. (We'd have to mine the Moon for materials for even that start-up base.)

Think of the business opportunities in securing the franchise to clean up junk in orbit around our planet. Melt it all down, you might make something useful out of it.....

Quote from: quiller on November 16, 2014, 07:30:06 AM
If NASA parks an asteroid or two and we find out that it/they contain precious metals, your first problem is mining and refining in space, to maximize the profit of bringing down that much ore (or whatever). Chopping the asteroid into big chunks wastes resources when you can clean out what you don't need and just ship the good stuff.

So it won't affect world markets unless and until it is on Earth. So much for economic alarmism.

But back to Step J above, where that mining and refining in space gets done, for without all that a permanent Moon base (and beyond) is financially impossible. (We'd have to mine the Moon for materials for even that start-up base.)

Think of the business opportunities in securing the franchise to clean up junk in orbit around our planet. Melt it all down, you might make something useful out of it.....

Yep, you're right, and when accounting for orbital return of a comet that they've been chasing for nearly a decade?
How long would it be before a return flight to earth could actually pay for itself?

Without capturing a comet and locking it in earths orbit, mining these things is a waste of time and money, simply no return on investment.

Quote from: Solar on November 16, 2014, 07:56:23 AM
Yep, you're right, and when accounting for orbital return of a comet that they've been chasing for nearly a decade?
How long would it be before a return flight to earth could actually pay for itself?

Without capturing a comet and locking it in earths orbit, mining these things is a waste of time and money, simply no return on investment.

If the U.S. were to retrieve a space-object containing true rare earths which we now depend upon the Chinese or others to supply, this would vastly reduce influence of foreign computer makers and designers (read, their governments).  National defense would come before any sharing of materials recovered (at whatever cost).

It would take years to reach the asteroid belts and more years for any kind of robotic scans for potentially viable objects-to-recover. Then would come the anchoring of tow-lines or any propulsion unit which could nominally NOT create a spin on the object which sends it off-course. (Meaning more than one such unit, to correct for over-steering.)

Did we mention the actual time it would take to get up to a speed where that same planetoid-thingie would reach us within a decade? When the reality meets the science-fiction writing, we have a TON of bugs to iron out before we start hauling ANYTHING away from ANYWHERE.

Quote from: quiller on November 16, 2014, 08:56:24 AM
If the U.S. were to retrieve a space-object containing true rare earths which we now depend upon the Chinese or others to supply, this would vastly reduce influence of foreign computer makers and designers (read, their governments).  National defense would come before any sharing of materials recovered (at whatever cost).

It would take years to reach the asteroid belts and more years for any kind of robotic scans for potentially viable objects-to-recover. Then would come the anchoring of tow-lines or any propulsion unit which could nominally NOT create a spin on the object which sends it off-course. (Meaning more than one such unit, to correct for over-steering.)

Did we mention the actual time it would take to get up to a speed where that same planetoid-thingie would reach us within a decade? When the reality meets the science-fiction writing, we have a TON of bugs to iron out before we start hauling ANYTHING away from ANYWHERE.

Exactly the point, it would probably take a couple of centuries before something like this became viable, unless we develop a Star Trek type transporter.
Lets work on transporter technology first.

Quote from: Solar on November 16, 2014, 09:39:02 AM
Exactly the point, it would probably take a couple of centuries before something like this became viable, unless we develop a Star Trek type transporter.
Lets work on transporter technology first.

Okey-dokey, so we skip the rockets bearing construction modules up to the Moon, and we beam up a crew to run it. Assuming we didn't burn up the planetary energy supply to do it....

Um...Scotty? Are you there, Scotty? We're in the dark down here at Starfleet, Scotty, please come in.....

The rocket bearing the first 3D printer was recently destroyed, setting back serious 3D testing by perhaps a decade or more. I'll leave it to darker minds to ponder if someone just sabotaged our way around the costs of expansion into space....

I like the 3D-printer concept. Send out robotic space-dust collectors, ships in programmed-to-return arcs which suck in and crush small objects into raw materials for the printers. You can scoop a lot of that in and around an asteroid belt. You can find, separate and use a lot of useful material...if you can just test it so people will fund it.

Quote from: quiller on November 16, 2014, 11:22:07 AM
Okey-dokey, so we skip the rockets bearing construction modules up to the Moon, and we beam up a crew to run it. Assuming we didn't burn up the planetary energy supply to do it....

Um...Scotty? Are you there, Scotty? We're in the dark down here at Starfleet, Scotty, please come in.....

The rocket bearing the first 3D printer was recently destroyed, setting back serious 3D testing by perhaps a decade or more. I'll leave it to darker minds to ponder if someone just sabotaged our way around the costs of expansion into space....

I like the 3D-printer concept. Send out robotic space-dust collectors, ships in programmed-to-return arcs which suck in and crush small objects into raw materials for the printers. You can scoop a lot of that in and around an asteroid belt. You can find, separate and use a lot of useful material...if you can just test it so people will fund it.

Hell just tell b o there 6 black people up there.  He would find all the funding that was needed.  Hell E Holder would even make it a new law.   

Quote from: quiller on November 16, 2014, 11:22:07 AM
Okey-dokey, so we skip the rockets bearing construction modules up to the Moon, and we beam up a crew to run it. Assuming we didn't burn up the planetary energy supply to do it....

Um...Scotty? Are you there, Scotty? We're in the dark down here at Starfleet, Scotty, please come in.....

The rocket bearing the first 3D printer was recently destroyed, setting back serious 3D testing by perhaps a decade or more. I'll leave it to darker minds to ponder if someone just sabotaged our way around the costs of expansion into space....

I like the 3D-printer concept. Send out robotic space-dust collectors, ships in programmed-to-return arcs which suck in and crush small objects into raw materials for the printers. You can scoop a lot of that in and around an asteroid belt. You can find, separate and use a lot of useful material...if you can just test it so people will fund it.

Silly boy, 3D printers are so yesterday, we'll just fire up the replicator.

The first 3D printed object in space was just manufactured on the ISS. Appropriately enough, it was a spare part for the printer itself. This was symbolically chosen to demonstrate the usefulness 3D printing can have in space. Manufacture your own replacement parts on site as needed instead of shipping up three of everything.

http://m.space.com/27861-3d-printer-space-station-first-part.html