Let's try to discus some realistic proposals of this board

Initially I list some topics I have in mind this moment:

1. Technologies to remove orbital debris or space junk.
2. Nano-Technologies providing possibilities to miniaturize spacecraft equipment (fits to Sigurd's list).

What do you think - might this topics be prizeable? What way should they be figured out more detailed?

What would you prefer or add?



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

Modification:

1. Technologies to REACH orbital debris, to CATCH orbital debris or to STORE orbital debirs in SPACE/CERTAIN ORBIT.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

The technology is there to get rid of orbital junk.
Nuke Nuke Nuke NukeNukeNuke Nuke Nuke Nuke NukeNuke Nuke Nuke Nuke Nuke Nuke
KABLOOIY!

Nanotechnology is a MUST.

With nanotechnology we can make materials so much easier. They would be 10-100x the strengh of steel, as thin as paper and Extremely light. CARBON-Nanotubes.

Im sure people in the space industry are well aware of nanotechnologies and how significant the technology is going to be in Future SpaceShips.

The materials would become inexpensive. You could litrually make Diamonds from thin air. Amazing possibilities. I bet a lot of people here are unaware of.

Do some research on Carbon Nanotubes and Nanotechnology. I thnk its overlooked often to how much help it is going to be. Will change the world drasticly. every industry, not just space

What parts or components of spacecrafts can be miniaturized by nanotechnologies or especially nanocarbontubes? Which of these should be most urgently?

What about the wings of SS1 or the Shuttle? What about mechanics or infrastructure for propellant?



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

Super spaceships not far out
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id ... 2&set_id=1

thats a good article about what im trying to put through.

Like i said, There are many technologies that are going to reveloutionize the whole world, Sure its not reported everywhere you look or hear, Its still early stages but the technology is the next big industrial reveloution

I believe the 21st century will be a time where all our dreams come true ... well most lol

Exactly!

--Ralph

I agree. It's only a matter of time now, before we have tech to do anything, fix any problem.
but there's always the possibility we'll destroy ourselves in the mean time :\

All this new technology sounds great, but it needs to be inexpensive, widely available and simple to apply before it will make a difference to the cost of spacefilght. The aerospace industry already uses advanced materials to reduce weight or improve efficiency, but the actual effect is to increase costs.

Instead, some of the x-prize teams, and others, seem to have adopted the KISS principle.
"Keep It Simple, Stupid." If you need more payload, build a bigger rocket. Don't spend 10 or 50 times as much on advanced materials or insanely complex manufacturing techniques (see space shuttle).

Yes we need new technology, and every effort should be made to promote its development. But until I can walk into my local hardware store, and pick up 100 sq ft of carbon nano-tube reinforced, self healing, radiation absorbing, power storing, chameleon, TV display, wall panelling for less than a week's pay, it's not going to have much of an impact on spaceflight costs.

We have the mature technology now to reduce costs to well below $1000 per kg to orbit. Let's use it!

Please refer to threads discassing nanotechnologies and/or nanocarbontubes in the Technology-section of this board. One of them I myself posted is "Two progresses to be reported".

Please take into account additionaly the time until the APS expires - in five years - and a second period of time until 2015.

Scaled Composites has been working on Wight Knight/SpaceShipOne for eight years and no team else has launched a vehicle up to 100 km at least. So concerning the WTN XPRIZE we should have in mind five to ten years.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

To remove space junk, I would favour some form of manoeuvrable craft which would intercept debris and then gently 'shove' it towards Earth's upper atmosphere where it would burn up on re-entry.

I don't have the exact calculations necessary to perform each shove, since the size and mass of the junk varies, but even the shuttle's short rocket retro burst is adequate to send it back to Earth.

So, if the craft was solar powered, then it could remain in LEO constantly seeking out and eradicating its targets.

To deorbit an object in a circular low Earth orbit you need to slow it down by about 400 to 500 kilometers per hour.

Hello, rgadon,

what size of craft do you have in mind? What materials should they be made of? Should they be reusable?

Another pount is that you are thinking of decelration of the debris and to burn in in the atmosphere - what size of debris do you have in mind? And can you imagine crafts that can keep the debris in space but collect it at a special place in orbit? For the collection of small debris it would be interesting to provide permanent touch of craft with debris after first contact. Perhaps debris by debris might be collected at that craft then - forming larger debris which would be easier to beobserved.

What about it? What I have in mind is something like a "Klebstoff" (missing the english translation) - something like "UHU", "Pritt", "Pattex" which are products I can buy in discounts here in Germany.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)