• UK should have a proper national space programme, report says - government says it's a cool idea and
    54 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Dysgalt;42860717]Go piss off Argentina more and launch your rockets from the Falklands?[/QUOTE] that would be one of the most entertaining shitstorms ever [editline]14th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=TestECull;42860863]Good. Every western nation needs a proper space program. We can't be relying on *just* NASA and Russia for everything. Space travel should be a global effort undertaken by every nation that can afford it.[/QUOTE] ever heard of the european space agency?
The British in space huh? Sure, why not. Exciting stuff if more nations get into a second space race. That means... If I'm correct and we don't have the sudden problem of going independent for some stupidly retarded reason*, the Scottish will also be in space, which to me, sounds a whole lot of fun, and when I think of the Scottish in space, I end up thinking this. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLxLmFhROqY[/media] [b]SOON[/b] *Because I doubt if we went independent that we would be going to space by ourselves, I shudder at the thought of them trying to organise that, looking from what they have done so far.
[QUOTE=bravehat;42860028]Good thing we're working on a single stage to orbit plane then right? [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft)[/url][/QUOTE] Yeah, you guys really need to construct additional Skylons.
[QUOTE=snookypookums;42860029]A controversial thought, but what if they used the Falklands for something like this?[/QUOTE] The Falklands are a bit too far south for effective equatorial orbits, so if you're going to need somewhere to launch East, it's not the best place anyway. Something like [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Launch]Sea Launch[/url] would work much better. [editline]14th November 2013[/editline] Also, a small national space program might be a nice thing to have for a while, but in the long run I think it would probably be better to increase ESA contributions instead of going about it on your own. [editline]14th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=TestECull;42860863]Good. Every western nation needs a proper space program. We can't be relying on *just* NASA and Russia for everything. Space travel should be a global effort undertaken by every nation that can afford it.[/QUOTE] ESA
OUR GALACTIC EMPIRE BEGINS!
[QUOTE=snookypookums;42860001]I'm all for space programs, but at the same time I really feel like there's a lot of earth that's still left unexplored, like deep sea explorations and thing. Gotta complete the main storyline before we go to the side quests, right? There's plenty about earth we're still finding put each day. Maybe all this space tech the world develops can probably be used to see what's down there.[/QUOTE] The deep sea and space are practically the exact opposite of environments. Ocean being much more inhospitable. A lot of engineering needs to go into developing tech that can survive the pressure. I say we explore both to our full ability at the same time.
Never even mind about Broken Britain just throw money into space
[QUOTE=snookypookums;42860001]I'm all for space programs, but at the same time I really feel like there's a lot of earth that's still left unexplored, like deep sea explorations and thing. Gotta complete the main storyline before we go to the side quests, right? There's plenty about earth we're still finding put each day. Maybe all this space tech the world develops can probably be used to see what's down there.[/QUOTE] I don't know why people always mistake space as a side quest, its pretty much the main questline.
[QUOTE=OvB;42861151]The deep sea and space are practically the exact opposite of environments. Ocean being much more inhospitable. A lot of engineering needs to go into developing tech that can survive the pressure. I say we explore both to our full ability at the same time.[/QUOTE] I agree, I was mostly talking about exotic materials research when I said that, but you're right - we should definitely explore both. Preferably I'd go for sea more than space at this point given the,uh, proximity. [editline]14th November 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=IrishBandit;42861213]I don't know why people always mistake space as a side quest, its pretty much the main questline.[/QUOTE] I refer to it as a side quest because, at this point, we lack the one fundamental thing that would make space travel feasible in terms of manned resource assessment/acquisition and exploration programs - powering vehicles fast enough to cover the vast distances involved with most of the celestial bodies that dot our night sky. Our goal should be go to space, no doubt - but given that we're yet to really say that we know absolutely everything about the planet we've evolved on, it seems more prudent to focus on that first or at least, in tandem with our desire to be amongst the stars.
[QUOTE=snookypookums;42861231]I agree, I was mostly talking about exotic materials research when I said that, but you're right - we should definitely explore both. Preferably I'd go for sea more than space at this point given the,uh, proximity. [editline]14th November 2013[/editline] I refer to it as a side quest because, at this point, we lack the one fundamental thing that would make space travel feasible in terms of manned resource acquisition and exploration programs - powering vehicles fast enough to cover the vast distances involved with most of the celestial bodies that dot our night sky. Our goal should be go to space, no doubt - but given that we're yet to really say that we know absolutely everything about the planet we've evolved on, it seems more prudent to focus on that first or at least, in tandem with our desire to be amongst the stars.[/QUOTE] Fundamentally I think we need to get a sizeable group of people the fuck off this rock. All it takes is one nasty rock that we haven't spotted to send us back to the stone age or wipe us out, with a self sufficient group of people off Earth then we practically double our chances of survival as a species.
Could launch from Ascension. Plenty of room, barely anyone will be disturbed, dry and clear all year round and it sits right on the equator almost.
[QUOTE=bravehat;42861271]Fundamentally I think we need to get a sizeable group of people the fuck off this rock. All it takes is one nasty rock that we haven't spotted to send us back to the stone age or wipe us out, with a self sufficient group of people off Earth then we practically double our chances of survival as a species.[/QUOTE] But at that point, why should making a colony in space or a distant planet with a possibly hostile environent at this point still be more feasible to us than an underwater colony a la Rapture (only without what happened there)? It would be an infinitely more hospitable environment compared to a planet and should solve a lot of out current population density problems as well. If we're talking about the one asteroid that [I]does[/I] make it through, a certain group of us would always suffer the consequences of us and some of us would survive, if we were offplanet or underwater - of course, we'd need a proper hypothetical situation with data to help actually determine the outcome of both situations but they are both valid, as valid as also assuming some calamity befalls settlers on a planet as well. I think that there is a solid case for pioneering both - deep sea exploration and undersea habitats as well as space exploration. Both hold a possible key for the extension of out species.
[QUOTE=snookypookums;42861350]But at that point, why should making a colony in space or a distant planet with a possibly hostile environent at this point still be more feasible to us than an underwater colony a la Rapture (only without what happened there)? It would be an infinitely more hospitable environment compared to a planet and should solve a lot of out current population density problems as well. If we're talking about the one asteroid that [I]does[/I] make it through, a certain group of us would always suffer the consequences of us and some of us would survive, if we were offplanet or underwater - of course, we'd need a proper hypothetical situation with data to help actually determine the outcome of both situations but they are both valid, as valid as also assuming some calamity befalls settlers on a planet as well. I think that there is a solid case for pioneering both - deep sea exploration and undersea habitats as well as space exploration. Both hold a possible key for the extension of out species.[/QUOTE] Because we can feasibly survive on Mars somewhat easily if we dig into the ground a little, it'll be a shit ton harder trying to survive on the ocean floor or some shit, best you could do is some huge floating city and who the fuck wants to deal with constantly living on the ocean? Even then a major asteroid impact could cause colossal issues for any ocean colonies too.
[QUOTE=FlandersNed;42860062]It sucks that Australia's not getting into this, though. We have a perfect launching area (Cape York) because it's quite close to the equator. Satellites can help us deal with climate prediction and providing other services for smaller countries near us. However, the only thing Dr. No wants Australia to be the forefront of is coal exports, it seems.[/QUOTE] If your implication is that Abbott and his government are being dicks for not pushing Australian space policy more, you know very little about the Australian economy and what sort of impact a space program would have on it. Australia should not and will not have a space program like the UK/EU/US, and we shouldn't even attempt to get too involved in this UK policy development, if at all. But I suppose any reason to attack Abbott, right?
So. Does this mean British Empire v2 - space edition?
[QUOTE=lintz;42859866]sure it's not like we're in debt or anything shouldn't we try to sort out everything here first BEFORE we start spending lots of money to boost another sector/[/QUOTE] If we put people like you in charge of this sort of thing we wouldn't have developed the bloody internal combustion engine, let alone go to the moon in the 60's. The bigger picture is actually more important than our debt.
[QUOTE=bravehat;42861448]Because we can feasibly survive on Mars somewhat easily if we dig into the ground a little, it'll be a shit ton harder trying to survive on the ocean floor or some shit, best you could do is some huge floating city and who the fuck wants to deal with constantly living on the ocean? Even then a major asteroid impact could cause colossal issues for any ocean colonies too.[/QUOTE] getting a significant quantity of anything to mars is extremely fucking expensive and not exactly swift facepunch likes to jerk off about colonising space but the truth is we can't do that until space travel is cheap (give it a century) and vaguely swift (never)
[QUOTE=lintz;42859866]sure it's not like we're in debt or anything shouldn't we try to sort out everything here first BEFORE we start spending lots of money to boost another sector/[/QUOTE] except debt in pounds isnt the issue, it's debt as a percentage of gdp that's the problem. so if you encourage growth then you do as much to tackle debt problem as you would by reigning in spending.
[QUOTE=snookypookums;42860001]I'm all for space programs, but at the same time I really feel like there's a lot of earth that's still left unexplored, like deep sea explorations and thing. Gotta complete the main storyline before we go to the side quests, right? There's plenty about earth we're still finding put each day. Maybe all this space tech the world develops can probably be used to see what's down there.[/QUOTE] lol some underwater parts are the main story and the rest of the universe is the side quest. what
or u know britain could just increase its part in the ESA, like by maybe offering to build, fund, and pay for launch of something.... that or develope in house with ESA partners, a manned launch system [editline]14th November 2013[/editline] i mean they kinda already are part of one.... [editline]14th November 2013[/editline] the argument about exploring the ocean vs exploring space...i'm for all exploration but habitation on the bottom of the ocean is not only very destructive to the enviroment there, but its also harder than living in space. i mean a space ship has to put up with somewhere between 0-1 atm of pressure, while an undersea dome would have to withstand thousands of tons of pressure on it...
[QUOTE=Intoxicated Spy;42862153]So. Does this mean British Empire v2 - space edition?[/QUOTE] [media][URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeqcVbJqxR0[/URL][/media] set lasers to patriotic
[QUOTE=DrDevil;42860016]But the UK doesn't have an east-facing ocean that's big enough for eventual rocket debris to fall into.[/QUOTE] No, but we do have France.
[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;42860879]There is always Ascension Island in the middle of nowhere.[/QUOTE] They should do this, if only for the fact that it has the perfect name.
Uh-huh. This is the same UK that is engaging in petty penny-pinching on the backs of the poor and unemployed?
[QUOTE=lintz;42859866]sure it's not like we're in debt or anything shouldn't we try to sort out everything here first BEFORE we start spending lots of money to boost another sector/[/QUOTE] Yeah but let's do that by properly taxing the rich, ending corruption in our government and educating before we start cutting research that is essential/beneficial for our country.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.