Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Eilliem

Star Trek

Recommended Posts

So I was daydreaming at work the other day and I thought of something interesting/cool (IMO). For those of you familiar with the Star Trek: Enterprise series you might think this is interesting as well. How much do you think would cost to build the NX-01 with our current monetary system? Now obviously we can’t have our Warp 5 Engine or the transporters amongst other things, but wouldn’t it be co;)? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see... what's the current cost-per-kilo to get something into orbit... and what did Enterprise weigh again? *brain snaps*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I immediately think of nickel- cobalt alloys and carbon nanotubes. ZOMG...

I see Gross National Product multiplied by a factor of a gazillion ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember the original series Enterprise weighing 190000 tonnes, which would put NX-01 at something like 100000 tonnes, which would amount to 531 launches of the Ares V...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember the original series Enterprise weighing 190000 tonnes, which would put NX-01 at something like 100000 tonnes, which would amount to 531 launches of the Ares V...

Nah, ya just teleport the whole thing up there . . . after being built via the replicator (whales in hold optional). ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically what your saying is, it’s possible;):D

in today terms i think it would be more feasible the build the Prometheus from stargate sg-1 than the nx starship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if we are going Star Gate (good show's BTW, SG1 and Atlantis, universe sucks)we should build a BC-304 then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the money in the world would not do it, sorry. We can’t even build a space shuttle, we are going back to old payload rockets. We can’t even make it to the moon any longer, literally, impossible any longer. I wish someone would just shoot that dieing/dead horse we call NASA and pull all the outrageous regulations so that private citizens could develop the means to reach for the stars without the crippling government bureaucracy. I mean as Reagan said, "Government isn't the solution to the problem, Government is the problem". Words could never be more true.

As for building it (if it were possible), we’d use a space elevator and build it in orbit, at least the first steps for building something that large. Still though, I think we need to develop something that can shield all the deadly radiation in space. At this point I think even trying to get to Mars would be a suicide mission, even if we could hurtle humans at it, which we cant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you say we can't send ppl to mars ? i say we can ... only problem is the cost ... there are other "more important" thins to spend our money on today like "global warming" and healthcare. if we really wanted it wouldn't be that harder compared to a trip to the moon ... only more pricy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem isn't money.. It's politics.

I guess we'll have to wait untill we discover a RL Pandora..

Then we'll have something to reach out for.. a real goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you say we can't send ppl to mars ? i say we can ... only problem is the cost ... there are other "more important" thins to spend our money on today like "global warming" and healthcare. if we really wanted it wouldn't be that harder compared to a trip to the moon ... only more pricy

You forgot war.

Space travel is pennies compared to war. So is any sort of environmental action. Health care is at least on the same order of magnitude as war, but honestly I'd be much more inclined to spend my tax dollars to save people's lives than to murder people, unlike the right wing in this country... who find any imaginable excuse to hold the opposite set of priorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you say we can't send ppl to mars ? i say we can ... only problem is the cost ... there are other "more important" thins to spend our money on today like "global warming" and healthcare. if we really wanted it wouldn't be that harder compared to a trip to the moon ... only more pricy

I say? No, not me, I'm just the messenger. Scientists and engineers say, and most are left scratching their heads regarding how to do it even just doing it with the technology we used before. That technology is long dead, and technology we have now falls short. Think about it, we cant even get a space shuttle into orbit any longer. You would think engineering a space shuttle would be easier now, but to the contrary. It's nothing new, explain how we built the pyramids. Show me a pyramid that is less than 1000 years old.

As for going to Mars, as I mentioned, the radiation would kill you. You ever see a fallout bunker? It's more than a few inches thick of some metal compound. The earth has a shield that stops the radiation, but hurtle a flimsy chunk of metal outside that shield and at some point it's going to get inundated with a mass ejection of radiation hurtling through space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I was watching the science channel awhile back, the way they plan to stop solar radation is a electromagnetic field generator, seems simple enough, my laptop puts out enough radiation to kill my "Genetic legacy" if you catch my drift ;), so making a field for a small space craft shouldnt be that hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I was watching the science channel awhile back, the way they plan to stop solar radation is a electromagnetic field generator, seems simple enough, my laptop puts out enough radiation to kill my "Genetic legacy" if you catch my drift ;), so making a field for a small space craft shouldnt be that hard.

Oh I'm sure it's more complicated than that. The discovery network is a funny thing, much of it is spin, almost like some form of propaganda machine. The History-ish channel is the most humorous, but that is besides the point.

Yes, there is strong application for electromagnetism, which is something that is very well undeveloped. Unfortunately, theory and application have huge gulfs in the in-between. And then what becomes of the result, it too can become a danger within itself. It may very well shield radiation and even generate gravity/anti-gravity fields, but from what I have come across, studies suggest such fields can be unhealthful for prolonged human exposure. I'm sure you are aware of the cell-phone controversy, yet being a relatively small emission field in comparison to such a large application as this. So we send out humans into space, but do they come back with cancer or simply looking like something that melted in the microwave?

That is something to go through the long road of R&D, but as was mentioned, there is a political problem. The difference is years vs. decades. As long as NASA enforces their monopoly as they retard the ability for private enterprise in this field, we will probably see NASA try to build giant slingshots to propel cargo loads into orbit at a cost of ten-trillion dollars per launch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I'm sure it's more complicated than that. The discovery network is a funny thing, much of it is spin, almost like some form of propaganda machine. The History-ish channel is the most humorous, but that is besides the point.

Yes, there is strong application for electromagnetism, which is something that is very well undeveloped. Unfortunately, theory and application have huge gulfs in the in-between. And then what becomes of the result, it too can become a danger within itself. It may very well shield radiation and even generate gravity/anti-gravity fields, but from what I have come across, studies suggest such fields can be unhealthful for prolonged human exposure. I'm sure you are aware of the cell-phone controversy, yet being a relatively small emission field in comparison to such a large application as this. So we send out humans into space, but do they come back with cancer or simply looking like something that melted in the microwave?

That is something to go through the long road of R&D, but as was mentioned, there is a political problem. The difference is years vs. decades. As long as NASA enforces their monopoly as they retard the ability for private enterprise in this field, we will probably see NASA try to build giant slingshots to propel cargo loads into orbit at a cost of ten-trillion dollars per launch.

This is just my opinion of what's really going on...

NASA is working as intended. It is supposed to be a roadblock to space exploration and development by organizations other than themselves. The "powers that be" have no intention on letting the human race leave this earth in any meaningful way until they say it's time and when it's according to their rules. All of the world's Space Agencies (Government controlled) have the same intended function.

It's all about Politics, it never has been a question of money or of science.

If I say anymore I will go so far beyond what is acceptable to post that I will get banned... I probably already have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we could build it up in orbit but then what? row is around? :)

Refuel it from the moon ;)

and/or deploy solar sails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish someone would just shoot that dieing/dead horse we call NASA and pull all the outrageous regulations so that private citizens could develop the means to reach for the stars without the crippling government bureaucracy.

What regulations are you talking about? As far as I know, any private citizen can build a spaceship and go into space if they want to. There are even incentives (privately, and maybe even publicly funded) in the form of rewards and bounties to whomever is able to achieve this first or consistently. Other than having to notify the FAA or whatever about their flight plan, I can't think of anything. Or is the govmn't really just trying to use NASA as a way to eat your babies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What regulations are you talking about? As far as I know, any private citizen can build a spaceship and go into space if they want to. There are even incentives (privately, and maybe even publicly funded) in the form of rewards and bounties to whomever is able to achieve this first or consistently. Other than having to notify the FAA or whatever about their flight plan, I can't think of anything. Or is the govmn't really just trying to use NASA as a way to eat your babies?

You say you are going to buy yourself a bottle of catchup or something? ^_^

---------

from: http://news.cnet.com/2009-11397_3-6211308.html

Space, by contrast, until recently has remained the domain of NASA. Burt Rutan, the aerospace engineer famous for building a suborbital rocket plane that won the Ansari X Prize, believes NASA is crowding out private efforts. "Taxpayer-funded NASA should only fund research and not development," Rutan said during a recent panel discussion at the California Institute of Technology. "When you spend hundreds of billions of dollars to build a manned spacecraft, you're...dumbing down a generation of new, young engineers (by saying), 'No, you can't take new approaches, you have to use this old technology.'"

Rutan and his fellow pilots, venture capitalists and entrepreneurs have undertaken a formidable task: To demonstrate to the public that space travel need not be synonymous with government programs. In fact, many of them say NASA has become more of a hindrance than a help.

------------

And there has been much in the way of those hindrances. You are dealing with NASA, yes the FAA and then stacks of environmentalist groups. NASA has a monopoly, and I'm surprised that you haven't heard of any of this as someone who follows any segment of the space industry. NASA is even opposed to space tourism, they blew a gasket when an American went to Russia to hitch a ride on one of their rockets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...