The next step outward is a step backwards???

[Sofaspud]

Well, whatever it turns out to be, I can tell you this: it needs to be cost-effective. Access to orbit needs to become as routine and cheap as access to
another continent (relatively speaking, of course). Whether it's through spacevators, linear catapults, Rutan's rubber-rocket, or Factor X, the only
way it'll be a viable solution is if it is worth the expense on every trip.

We live at the bottom of a deep pit, and to do anything interesting we have to climb out. Right now we're doing that by shoving unstable chemicals up our
asses and lighting them on fire, hoping we make it to to the top in one piece AND can come back down again.

We've got a cannon, but all we need is a fucking ladder. Metaphorically speaking.

Besides the space elevator concept (which I quite like, assuming we can get materials science advanced past the theory stage), I've heard interesting ideas
about multi-stage platforms -- essentially, large, permanent gasbag-lift structures that act as waypoints. Take an ordinary plane to one, ride a scramjet to
the next, and the third lets you lift into orbit on a rocket (which, at that altitude, would be relatively cheap).

But that's probably even less likely than a spacevator, unfortunately. Hella cool, but safety concerns have so far ruled out any permanently-floating
structures and I don't see this being any different.

--sofaspud
--"Listening to your kid is the audio equivalent of a Salvador Dali painting, Spud." --OpMegs

[CattyNebulart]

The shuttle is a bad design. It was started with the air-farce as a joint project, in order to have more funding. but then the air-farce baked out in the
middle of the design and with that went a good chunck of the funding nasa was banking on but by that time the shuttle had a lot of design features that nasa
didn't want or need however they where stuck with the design.

Also nasa's budget is far less than it was during the spacerace, which is why they are not accomplishing much.

I for one would like to see us starting some more space industry such as a Space based solar power plant because the more industry is up there the more
attractive it becomes to do some manufacturing there which would bring down costs massively.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[TheTwisted1]

Unfortunately for the space elevator concept, even if we could get materials strong enough (which may be impossible: see Professor Nicola M. Pugno's work), there are stability issues which would cancel any benefits; see
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... nline-news.
There don't appear to be any good options, which, as a life-long enthusiast for space exploration, I find rather disheartening.

--The Twisted One
"If you
wish to converse with me, define your
terms."

--Voltaire

[ordnance11]

So what we want then is a reliable, fairly cheap launch vehicle then? Something in order of the Saturn V or Energia? I can see for low earth orbit use,
sticking a reusable vehicle on top of a modified Saturn. A 1.5 stage vehicle..preferably with folding down jet engines. It might end up having the aerodynamics
of a powered glider, but better that than an unpowered glider.

Build a true spaceport in High Earth orbit...and then maufacturing facilities on the moon. From there missions to mars and the rest of the solar system should
be econmically feasible.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[Valles]

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket ... ibertyship

Might be interesting.
===========

===============================================
"V, did you do something foolish?"
"Yes, and it was glorious."