Canadian Space program

Discussion in 'The Club House' started by Vincine, Jan 30, 2012.

  1. Vincine

    Vincine New Member

    3,495
    0
    0
  2. texaswoodworker

    texaswoodworker New Member

    10,198
    0
    0
    They can put several pounds of stuff into space for $400, but it cost several thousand dollars for us to just put 1 pound into space? NASA sucks at money management. :D
     

  3. trip286

    trip286 New Member

    18,658
    1
    0
    Hell yeah they do. Look at their zero gravity pen vs the russian's pencil.
     
  4. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    You mean this one?
     
  5. tCan

    tCan Active Member

    1,174
    0
    36
    Not to get all punny, but it would take an astronomical amount of helium to accomplish this for shuttle craft. And then you need to get it into orbit without a major failure of your buoyancy device.

    Assuming a 3 pound load, these boys imparted 346,000 joules of energy on their pay load.

    To get that same three pound load into orbit would require an additional 41,400,000 joules of energy to sustain orbit and another 20,000,000 joules to achieve orbit if rocketry were to be used to launch. That's about 175 times more energy than these boys were able to take advantage of.

    I know these units are technically not accurate, but I just wanted to illustrate a point.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2012
  6. texaswoodworker

    texaswoodworker New Member

    10,198
    0
    0
    Yeah, it would take a lot of helium, but if you look at what private companies spend to put something into space, you'll see that NASA still spends several more times more money to put the same thing into space. :D
     
  7. MrWray

    MrWray New Member

    6,424
    0
    0
    You would think that as much money that is spent on space R&D,there would be commercial space travel and vacation resorts by now :)
     
  8. tCan

    tCan Active Member

    1,174
    0
    36
    The technology is there. It's the money that isn't. The whole point of my previous post was to illustrate the sheer magnitude of energy required to put even a small amount of matter into orbit. Do you think energy is becoming cheaper and more abundant? No! It's the other way around.

    I don't have the stats, but I would venture to guess that once in orbit, space craft are able to sustain a small crew for a month using well less than 5% of the energy it took to get into space in the first place.
     
  9. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    Just vote for Gingrich... twice.... :D

    /His support of NASA is something I actually like about the guy.

    NASA may cost more but they also do it first and have a pretty outstanding safety record considering the number of people/objects they have sent into space safely. Keep in mind they were do things that have NEVER been done and thought to be impossible by many.