Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT 22-26 August 2011 (1996-2000)
Skewbrow:
I didn't know about NERVA. Not a surprise actually given that in my youth I was definitely more interested in the math/physics of space travel as opposed to the engineering problems. That Wikipedia article tells the story, but I also get the vibe that whoever wrote it, is not a great fan of Nixon administration.
IIRC one of the goals of the Space Shuttle program was the reusability of the components - like that huge tank of propellant would be the only part that was irretrievably lost after a launch? Does anyone here know, whether the thruster rockets (or whatever) were actually successfully retrieved? That aspect of the shuttle program has not received much publicity since the early launches. Could you lift a rocket high enough with those for a safe ignition of a NERVA? Probably not?
As much as I would like to see human beings on Mars in my lifetime, I have little right to complain, for it ain't my tax dollar paying for it. An international effort might be able to pay for it, but I don't see much public support for such a program. The first space race was very much about national pride on both sides, I think.
Boradis:
--- Quote from: Akima on 30 Aug 2011, 05:53 ---But that's the thing. We don't even have the same capability we had in 1968. There are no Saturn V rockets any more, never mind anything better using modern materials. We've gone backwards in our ability to lift payload into orbit, not forwards, for all the non-butt-sitting your rocket scientists have been doing. That isn't because the technical challenges became any greater, but because of political/managerial decisions.
--- End quote ---
The technical challenges have remained the same, and you're right about the funding cuts. But the real bottom line, IMO, is that the technical challenge -- in other words the propulsion problem -- are a pretty big deal.
Check out the first three vehicles in this image. How much of each actually contains crew/payload and how much is whopping big fuel tanks? The answers are "hardly any," and "pretty much the whole thing."
Even if our economy was booming to the degree it was in the 50s/60s the reason we haven't gone back to the moon is right there in the design of the Saturn V. By my eyeball estimate it looks like 275 feet of fuel to send and return 10 feet of crew/cargo (I'm kind of handwaving over the LEM and Control Module).
If a car had the same fuel/passenger ratio it would be the size of a Saturn V. Why do I say that? Because the Command Module is only about as big as a compact car.
Can you imagine driving that to Grandma's?
--- Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 30 Aug 2011, 11:56 ---You don't irradiate the launch site if the nuclear rocket is an upper stage.
--- End quote ---
Maybe it won't irradiate the launch site but it's still a nice big fallout fire hose. Especially if they get used routinely, which I think we all want.
--- Quote from: starkruzr on 30 Aug 2011, 11:25 ---Am I the only one who's a little surprised that anthro chassis as indistinguishably human as this new Momo one are actually allowed in the QCverse?
--- End quote ---
Agreed. How long until we or Jeph forget Momo's a robot?
gangler:
--- Quote from: jwhouk on 30 Aug 2011, 13:14 ---
--- Quote from: starkruzr on 30 Aug 2011, 11:25 ---Am I the only one who's a little surprised that anthro chassis as indistinguishably human as this new Momo one are actually allowed in the QCverse?
She could be a real girl (as distinct from a RealGirl™) with dyed hair and contacts.
This has Consequences®.
--- End quote ---
Actually, no, considering Eve from AppleGeeks has shown up in the strip. She's essentially a home-built APC made from Mac parts, and she does look realistic.
--- End quote ---
What I don't get is why an AI would want to look like a human. Soft, weak, bags of meat. A monument to mortality. Like modeling yourself after an egg with a timed explosive inside.
I'd think they were mocking us, but Momo doesn't seem like the type.
It's gotta be part of the cultural upbringing or something. I wonder if AI's that are raised in places without the pervasive sense of human superiority have an interest in emulating our appearance?
Although it could just as easily be that their libido is such that humans are what they're interested in, thus making the basic aesthetic value of looking human hold a lot of appeal to them. Not to belabor a point, but if you're into human men, and you identify as female, then it's not such a stretch to want to pass for a human female.
All in all it's all quite interesting. There almost seems that there could be an entire field of psychology based around studying AI's.
Mr_Rose:
Skewbrow; the Shuttle itself was never meant to operate like it ended up doing; the initial design concepts were all two-component, with both being manned and reusable: The Orbiter would ride the back of a sub-orbital aircraft then detach and use its own engines to boost itself to orbital altitude and speed.
Then someone decided hat the reusable booster was too expensive and designed a SSTO version.
Then someone else decided that the cargo space was too small on that design and gave it an external, disposable, fuel tank.
Then yet another someone figured out that the whole thing was too heavy to get off the ground like that and bolted on the reusable boosters.
And thus the new 'cheaper' design ended up with less reusable components and greater per-flight costs than the original specification and still cost more than the disposable systems that came before and after.
(the white firework boosters are reusable and were re-used)
Method of Madness:
I'm not sure if we're still doing this, but this is the strip where I started high school!
Edit: Oops, should've put this in the other thread.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version