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

Re: starship-design: The Case for Space

In a message dated 10/13/99 11:01:51 PM, bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca writes:

>"L. Parker" wrote:
>> > The lower level of technology into space the better. I don't
>> > want my access
>> > limited into space
>> > because of QM37 mega-transitor that's on the  cutting edge of
>> > stupidity.
>> As long as you aren't being needlessly antitechnology - sure. If it wasn't
>> for the quote in your signature I would have thought you were doing just
>> that.
>I am not antitecholgy, but I am aware that deep space access requires
>independent human habitat far from earth, 

Where did you come up with that idea!!?

>and like to keep things simple
>possible, and have several options open and alternate plans for development.
>I do how ever distrust BIG things because there is no longer any feedback
>the people in control, or I can't fix it myself.   

How do you build a little city?  Even with thatthe space platforms would be 
dependent on Earth techno-infastructure.

>> Nobody wants to trust their life, or their children's lives, to
>> untried technology. This is reflected in the current space program in
>> spades. Almost all computer hardware and software employed in spacecraft
>> at least two generations out of date -- and therefore thoroughly debugged!
>> There are similar situations for most other hardware components as well.
> There still can be mistakes -- look at the metric -- english measurement
>the latest mars probe. I hope Microsoft does not develop the life support.
>On the flip side of the coin, some the probes sent out in the 70's are
>back data. 
>I agree with most things but differ in details. 
>Like the space station. I would have dumped the current design and the
>and spent the 1/3 the money on international reusable launch vehicle, 1/3
>on the
>ground with live
>testing and 1/3 to build it. I also still like the ring-wheel type space
>As a Canadian I can't really tell NASA how to run its job as I don't pay
>to them. <grin>.

No way is using decades old computers and software a better safety idea.