 | | Re: NASA IS GOING BACK BABY
|
|
(...) Actually space manufacturing will likly be a big business sooner (as in the next few decades) than people might think. Due to the "instant" cooling space permits it is possible to make super strong alloys that are physically impossible to do (...) (18 years ago, 6-Feb-07, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Spaceship Surface Transport
|
|
(...) I like this quite a bit - it would have come in handy tootling around my Moonbase module (the Alpha-Omega Landing Pad II) for sure! My two nitpicks are so small I can't believe I'm bringing them up, but I would have figured the Classic Space (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: NASA IS GOING BACK BABY
|
|
(...) Tourism will be the initial market for suborbital space transports. The prime example of this sort of craft will be Space Ship Two (Virgin Galactic). (...) Actually, I thought that there was already some concern on the part of scientists that (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Spaceship Surface Transport
|
|
(...) Wolf, Another great Classic Space MOC! Actually this is my favorite (so far) since it is such a unique concept and very well executed. I like the idea of a maintenance transporter for larger spacecraft very well. As always, you uphold the (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: NASA IS GOING BACK BABY
|
|
(...) Actually, exactly the point I was trying to make (you just made it shorter). If there's an economic or resource-driven reason for doing something, commercial interests do a great job. But if you want to go somewhere, trying to invent (...) (18 years ago, 5-Feb-07, to lugnet.space)
|
