Subject:
|
Re: NASA IS GOING BACK BABY
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Tue, 6 Feb 2007 02:57:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5341 times
|
| |
|
|
[somewhere far away in the internet, a poor soul struggles valiently to stay
on-topic... "it's not LEGO!!" he screams, but the siren song of inccorect
physics draws him screaming back into the fray once more...]
In lugnet.space, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
> Actually space manufacturing will likly be a big business
> sooner (as in the next few decades) than people might
> think.
I still have my doubts. It's not that you can't make some really amazing things
in microgravity (you can - forget supermetals, think clean monocrystaline
silicon). It's that it's not *cost effective* to do it. Even for something like
computer chips (where a small amount of crystal manaufacturing could produce a
whole lot of profitable product), there are cheaper ways to do it on Earth. Like
make 1000 chips, and throw away the 999 that aren't up to really really high
standards. As to making bulk metals objects in space... ouch. Metal is *heavy*,
and you currently have to pay dearly for every kilo you lift. Can you get around
this? Sure... import an asteroid. Oh, but in order to make that profitable, you
need to have a market, which means you need on-orbit manufacturing, etc... which
again, isn't economical if your resources and market are down at the bottom of
the local gravity well.
> Due to the "instant" cooling space permits...
Actually, thermal regulation of things in space is dang difficult, cooling
especially (think about it - you're surrounded by a vacuum much much better than
the one in thermos bottle (or, for that matter, a better vacuum than a
high-grade lab vacuum). Dumping heat is a real problem in space. A good chunk of
the Apollo PLESS backbacks were chunks of ice to use as a heat sink (ice
sublimating to a vacuum is still a good way to transfer heat).
> it is possible to make super strong alloys that are
> physically impossible to do on earth because they
> seperate before cooling.
There's where microgravity comes in. But note that we still haven't gotten
there, even though we've had access in one form or another to microgravity
environments since the late 60's.
> As tourism leads to better "rocket-ships"...
Perswonally, I think we need to dump "rocket ships" altogether, and go for
either fixed tethers (space elevators), hypersonic skyhooks, or the like. But
no, those aren't very Classic space, and would be difficult MOC*.
--
Brian Davis
*note desperate attempt to stay on-charter
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: NASA IS GOING BACK BABY
|
| (...) I would add *yet* to that. (...) Hmmm... I don't know a town layout on the floor with a "space elevator" to a manufacturing platform way up on a shelf could make a really cool albeit parts intensive MOC. -Mike Petrucelli (17 years ago, 6-Feb-07, to lugnet.space)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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 (...) (17 years ago, 6-Feb-07, to lugnet.space)
|
22 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
