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

["L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>]

Several months ago I made the statement that there is more incentive to 
stay in space where power is cheap, resources are plentiful and 
(comparatively) easy to get at. So I really have a hard time seeing why 
anyone would want to go to another star just to _settle_ on a planet.

If you bear that in mind, and look at the mission profile as one that is 
designed to begin building an outpost in orbit in that system for the 
purpose of continuing exploration and creating a spaceborne infrastructure 
for follow on missions, only some of which might be concerned with actually 
landing on a planet, then it is not a one way mission. Nor is it exactly a 
colonization mission.

It is a team of scientists, and engineers and technicians with a definite 
purpose - build a fully self sustaining outpost in orbit around another 
star. Once they have done that they can then build power stations to 
produce more fuel so that 2-way travel becomes more practicable. There 
would be additional personnel arriving on follow on missions and maybe 
eventually some of the original personnel might even get to go home.

Remember that most of the people who will be going on these missions will 
probably have come from our off-planet population in the first place. They 
aren't going to see a great deal of difference between a colony on Luna or 
Ceres and one orbiting another star.

Lee

                                                      (o o)
--------------------------------------------------oOO--(_)--OOo---------

PLEASE NOTE: Some Quantum Physics Theories Suggest That When the Consumer
Is Not Directly Observing This Product, It May Cease to Exist or Will
Exist Only in a Vague and Undetermined State.