[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: starship-design: One way (again...)

> From: KellySt@aol.com
> In a message dated 12/3/97 7:23:07 AM, zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl wrote:
> >> From: kuo@bit.csc.lsu.edu (Isaac Kuo)
> >> 
> >> I disagree.  If I were offered the chance to fly on a 1 way mission
> >> to the Alpha Centauri systems at .2c (where I'd then spend the rest
> >> of my life), I for one would jump at it. I'm sure there are many
> >> others who'd be just as excited to do so.
> >>
> >Hey, Isaac, I was one of the first on the list, quite a time ago, 
> >to be excited to go.
> >
> >Welcome to the Club!
> >
> >-- Zenon
> >
> >PS. WARNING: Kelly is strongly against. 
> >    He declares it his duty to the mankind to stop us by force,
> >    possibly even by shooting us!   ;-)                    - Z
> Nah, I just feel that to preserve any chance of geting the program approved
> I'ld need to shoot anyone who'ld suggest it.   ;)
> As an asside it would be far cheaper to do a two way mission then a quicker
> one way mission, since you'ld to launch a couple orders of magnitude less
> stuff to build a sustainable colony....
> Opps forget, you were happy with a one way suicide mission. (I.E. no return,
> no sustainable colony/life support, and the folks back home get to bet on the
> ship or crew dieing first on internation TV.)  
Wrong. I never was happy with THAT.

I was happy with a one-way non-suicide mission.
That is, no return, colony/life support sustainable
till natural death (say, 200 year supplies should suffice, huh?).
An what the folks are doing back home... who cares?
My home will be over there...

-- Zenon