NASA: back to capsules?

[zakur]

Apollo-like capsule may replace shuttle

CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (Reuters) -- NASA may replace its troubled fleet of space shuttles with a new generation of Apollo-type space capsules, a top space agency official said.

"Certainly we have considerable amount of experience flying with capsules," Dr. John Rogacki, director of NASA's space transportation directorate, told Reuters on Wednesday. "One might say on the capsule side it could be that that design experience may lead to a capsule being available sooner than a winged vehicle."

Unlike shuttles that land like airplanes, capsules splash down in the ocean and must be recovered by ships.

The resurrection of space capsules, which last launched three decades ago, is gaining favor among astronauts, space agency officials and congressional staffers after the shuttle Columbia disaster that killed seven astronauts on February 1.

The 13 members of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board were unanimous in urging NASA to replace the aging shuttles as soon as possible by using existing technology and materials.

Cheaper, too, I imagine.

 

[Diamond]

Cheaper, slower, less manoeverable. Chuck Yeager referred to the Apollo capsules as "spam in a can".

The fundamental question is why put men into outer space at all when there's so little economic return? (I speak as the Devil's Advocate).

With the shuttle program virtually over, perhaps we can turn the International Space Station into a Space Hotel, have the Russians send people up for $20 million a pop using 30 year-old Soyuz technology, and lets forget all the sissy scientific stuff.

 

[Moccomouse]

The fundamental question is why put men into outer space at all when there's so little economic return? (I speak as the Devil's Advocate).

I'd like to think we are in space for a more noble reason than financial gain, wouldn't you?

 

[Chaos]

Space flight will generate lots of profit, but probably not within the current bureaucratical generations lifetime.

Think of manufacturing in zero-G.
Think of mining on the moon or in the asteroid belt.
Think of solar collectors in geosynchronous orbit providing all our energy needs.

Trust me: it will pay someday. Just don´t hold your breath while you wait for it.

 

[Diamond]

I'd like to think we are in space for a more noble reason than financial gain, wouldn't you?

I would agree, but how far will nobility get you without it?

 

[zer0vector]

I'd like to think we are in space for a more noble reason than financial gain, wouldn't you?

I'd be the first to argue the exploration of space should be done for it's own sake, but in reality I think drastic jumps in space science will only come through commercialization. The exploration of new frontiers is driven by the desire for gain. Think tobacco in the new world, or the many gold rushes in the american west. Sure, these places would have been explored EVENTUALLY, but the true drive came from commercial interest.

Just imagine if GM or Wal-Mart or Exxon/Mobil could suddenly gain something by exploring space. The mass of both money and resources would be unprecendented.

 

[Ove]

Cheaper, slower, less manoeverable. Chuck Yeager referred to the Apollo capsules as "spam in a can".

No actually it is "Cheaper, faster and more manouverable. Chuck was talking about Mercury which allmost was a dustbin on top of a rocket. Apollo capsules was far mor maneouverable than the shuttle.

Just think, they LEFT the earth atmosphere and went to the moon and back. The shuttle can just barely get into orbit and has to use additional boosters if it has to put sattelites in orbit.

The shuttle looks like a aeroplane and the last part of the journey is made gliding.

Think of manufacturing in zero-G.
Think of mining on the moon or in the asteroid belt.
Think of solar collectors in geosynchronous orbit providing all our energy needs.

On a tourist level: Think of sex in zero-G

 

[Zep]

{snip}

On a tourist level: Think of sex in zero-G

Actually, I suspect it would be darn difficult! Certainly some "interesting" positions could be achieved, but you still need something to push against to, ummm, achieve the primary goal of the exercise. However I'm certain there are some inventive engineers who wouldn't mind putting their minds to this...

 

[Ove]

Actually, I suspect it would be darn difficult! Certainly some "interesting" positions could be achieved, but you still need something to push against to, ummm, achieve the primary goal of the exercise. However I'm certain there are some inventive engineers who wouldn't mind putting their minds to this...

Arthur C. Clarke wrote about it in "Rendevous with Rama" where he let the commander have sex with one of his officers in the final chapter. The commander the reflects on past life and calls sex in 1g for "Clumsy" (or something similar).

 

[MRC_Hans]

Clarke has touched on that subject repeatedly, heheh. You could actually say he was preoccupied with it.


Hans

 

[toddjh]

On a tourist level: Think of sex in zero-G

Heh...I bet it would be a lot less fun than it sounds. On Earth, you only have to exert yourself one way; you can count on gravity to do the work in the opposite direction. In zero-g, you have to exert yourself both in and out, not to mention make sure you don't go flying apart when things get hot and sweaty. Plus, you couldn't depend on friction with the bed/table/floor giving you something to push against.

As for positions, I bet the variety would be more limited in space -- the man and woman (or whoever) would have to be basically perpendicular in order for the torques to stay manageable. Forget kissing during sex.

And when you're done, the room would most likely be full of little droplets of sweat, saliva, and various other bodily fluids. Very bad for electronics!

Jeremy

 

[Ove]

On the other hand it would give the question "Did the earth move under you too"? a whole new meaning.

Regarding the practical matters i would suspect that a elastic belt would help a lot but just think: No more discussion about who's on top.

 

[Zep]

Just one stray push against some part of the wall, and you would start spinning unstoppably... Oh, the fun/nausea that will ensue then.

 

[Hand Bent Spoon]

I've always thought that the first sex in space happened with the first woman in space. Not likely, I know, but I like to entertain these things sometimes.

Here's what two people trying to have sex in space would look like:

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

On the other hand it would give the question "Did the earth move under you too"? a whole new meaning.

Regarding the practical matters i would suspect that a elastic belt would help a lot but just think: No more discussion about who's on top.

Seriously, if we ever reach a point where people are permanent residents of outer space, there will probably be a piece of furniture other than the bed specifically designed for the purpose.

I'm picturing something like the shower on Skylab, but built for two. This was sort of a loose sleeve around the entire body, with a shower and a vacuum cleaner.