| |
Main
Date: 23 Jul 2007 01:04:19
From: Eric
Subject: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
I was reading about it on the net but i cant find any info that it actually
got launched
Thanks
Eric
|
|
| |
Date: 23 Jul 2007 12:50:43
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
World Wide Launch Log
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/tracking/launchlog.html
|
| | |
Date: 24 Jul 2007 01:10:49
From: Eric
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
>
> World Wide Launch Log
> http://www.spaceflightnow.com/tracking/launchlog.html
Good link, apparently it never did get off the ground
Eric
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Jul 2007 13:53:21
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
Eric wrote:
> Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>> World Wide Launch Log
>> http://www.spaceflightnow.com/tracking/launchlog.html
>
> Good link, apparently it never did get off the ground
> Eric
I'm not sure it even has launch funding. :-o
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Jul 2007 00:16:39
From: Eric
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
> Eric wrote:
>> Sam Wormley wrote:
>>
>>> World Wide Launch Log
>>> http://www.spaceflightnow.com/tracking/launchlog.html
>>
>> Good link, apparently it never did get off the ground
>> Eric
>
> I'm not sure it even has launch funding. :-o
Do you think the theory behind it is sound?
Eric
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Jul 2007 16:00:22
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
Eric wrote:
>
> Do you think the theory behind it is sound?
> Eric
>
I'm just guessing--the theory and technology are just fine, but
what is the application at this point in time? What does the
funding buy?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jul 2007 22:45:46
From: Eric
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
> Eric wrote:
>
>>
>> Do you think the theory behind it is sound?
>> Eric
>>
>
> I'm just guessing--the theory and technology are just fine, but
> what is the application at this point in time? What does the
> funding buy?
I think if we ever intend to explore outside the solar system (unmanned)
we need to work on getting the speeds up, the M2P2 was supposed to set a
speed record. I see things in about the same light as when we were first
looking at the sound barrier.
Alpha Cent is about 4.25 ly right? Thats approx 24.9 trillion miles one way.
At 10 milion mph we could be there in about 30 years sending radio data
back. The big question is, is it possible to get a vehicle up to that
speed, and if so, is it possible to have it survive at those speeds for 30
years without running into a particle that would vaporize it? I've heard of
various methods to protect against that sort of thing that sound quite
reasonable.
It seems to me that NASA spends way to much time and money on pet
projects. They seem to miss the big picture. Prime goals right now should
be: #1 manned mission to Mars, #2 Manned moon base, #3 Science package to
Europa to drill through the ice. Work to create very fast space vehicles
supports all 3 of those goals. We have mucked around in LEO far too long.
It rankles me to no end that the shuttle and various other projects are
used primarily as political tools ie various "mixed nation" crews, teacher
in space, student dust collector to pluto, yada yada yada
Whats next? Send a palestinian to the ISS?
Eric
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Aug 2007 13:37:46
From: Margo Schulter
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
Eric <NoOne@invalid.com > wrote:
> Alpha Cent is about 4.25 ly right? Thats approx 24.9 trillion miles one way.
> At 10 milion mph we could be there in about 30 years sending radio data
> back. The big question is, is it possible to get a vehicle up to that
> speed, and if so, is it possible to have it survive at those speeds for 30
> years without running into a particle that would vaporize it? I've heard of
> various methods to protect against that sort of thing that sound quite
> reasonable.
Hi, there, and may I query whether at around 0.015c (as another posted has
accurately described this velocity), getting to Alpha Centauri wouldn't
actually take more like 300 years than 30 years -- my calculator shows
around 283 years if we use oldstyle units rather than metric ones and
take c to be approximately 186,000 miles per second.
I'm not sure how much this affects the questions of scientific or political
priorities involved, or if there are any projections at when 0.015c might
actually become a practical speed for Earth-based technologies.
Best,
Margo Schulter
mschulter@calweb.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 27 Jul 2007 12:41:37
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
Eric wrote:
> Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>> Eric wrote:
>>
>>> Do you think the theory behind it is sound?
>>> Eric
>>>
>> I'm just guessing--the theory and technology are just fine, but
>> what is the application at this point in time? What does the
>> funding buy?
>
> I think if we ever intend to explore outside the solar system (unmanned)
> we need to work on getting the speeds up, the M2P2 was supposed to set a
> speed record. I see things in about the same light as when we were first
> looking at the sound barrier.
> Alpha Cent is about 4.25 ly right? Thats approx 24.9 trillion miles one way.
> At 10 milion mph we could be there in about 30 years sending radio data
> back. The big question is, is it possible to get a vehicle up to that
> speed, and if so, is it possible to have it survive at those speeds for 30
> years without running into a particle that would vaporize it? I've heard of
> various methods to protect against that sort of thing that sound quite
> reasonable.
> It seems to me that NASA spends way to much time and money on pet
> projects. They seem to miss the big picture. Prime goals right now should
> be: #1 manned mission to Mars, #2 Manned moon base, #3 Science package to
> Europa to drill through the ice. Work to create very fast space vehicles
> supports all 3 of those goals. We have mucked around in LEO far too long.
> It rankles me to no end that the shuttle and various other projects are
> used primarily as political tools ie various "mixed nation" crews, teacher
> in space, student dust collector to pluto, yada yada yada
> Whats next? Send a palestinian to the ISS?
> Eric
>
The latter might do more for world piece than getting up to 0.015 c in
a raceship (race+spaceship).
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 27 Jul 2007 12:59:11
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: did M2P2 ever launch?
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
> Eric wrote:
>> Sam Wormley wrote:
>>
>>> Eric wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you think the theory behind it is sound?
>>>> Eric
>>>>
>>> I'm just guessing--the theory and technology are just fine, but
>>> what is the application at this point in time? What does the
>>> funding buy?
>>
>> I think if we ever intend to explore outside the solar system (unmanned)
>> we need to work on getting the speeds up, the M2P2 was supposed to set a
>> speed record. I see things in about the same light as when we were first
>> looking at the sound barrier. Alpha Cent is about 4.25 ly right? Thats
>> approx 24.9 trillion miles one way.
>> At 10 milion mph we could be there in about 30 years sending radio data
>> back. The big question is, is it possible to get a vehicle up to that
>> speed, and if so, is it possible to have it survive at those speeds
>> for 30
>> years without running into a particle that would vaporize it? I've
>> heard of
>> various methods to protect against that sort of thing that sound quite
>> reasonable. It seems to me that NASA spends way to much time and
>> money on pet
>> projects. They seem to miss the big picture. Prime goals right now should
>> be: #1 manned mission to Mars, #2 Manned moon base, #3 Science package to
>> Europa to drill through the ice. Work to create very fast space vehicles
>> supports all 3 of those goals. We have mucked around in LEO far too long.
>> It rankles me to no end that the shuttle and various other projects are
>> used primarily as political tools ie various "mixed nation" crews,
>> teacher
>> in space, student dust collector to pluto, yada yada yada
>> Whats next? Send a palestinian to the ISS?
>> Eric
>>
>
> The latter might do more for world piece than getting up to 0.015 c in
> a raceship (race+spaceship).
>
I don't mean to leave the wrong impression, as I think it is good to
explore advance propulsion systems. However in the environment of competing
funding, the science return may not justify the costs at this time.
|
|
