I really find Chris Carberry’s op-ed on SLS incomprehensible. Oh, I don’t mean I don’t understand it, it just seems disconnected with reality, and the interests of anyone seriously interested in seeing humans go to Mars. He speaks about SLS as thought it has kind of reality, and actual utility. To me, a sane Mars organization would be screaming bloody murder at the waste of money to the detriment of hardware needed to actually get to Mars.
This idiotic sort of thing is what my current project, to make the international legal environment more friendly to space development and settlement, partially about.
No, literally (I hate that as a title of a space article or op-ed). They’re apparently doing a reboot. I thought the show was stupid as a kid, but as my old roommate Alan Katz (and Glenn Reynolds) noted, the first season, which I missed as a kid, was actually quite dark and interesting, before it devolved into camp with the robot flailing its arms around shouting “Danger, Will Robinson.” It could be interesting. But then, I think between acclaim of The Expanse and everything exciting happening in real spaceflight, it could be new golden age for good space-based hard science fiction, in all venues.
I’m back in Florida, not for fun. Still trying to get another house ready to sell, so we’ll finally be done with real estate in this wretched state. I hope to see the Falcon launch on Sunday, but from afar (I’ll be down in west Palm Beach County). So probably not a lot of blogging for the next week, but I’ll post a couple of things a day, to keep the conversation going. Just to let you know, you know, that I am at least keeping an eye on comments.
And congrats to SpaceX for another successful launch and getting closer on fairing recovery. I’m sure Mr. Steven is disappointed. Though I’ve heard that ships get upset when you anthropomorphize them.
Martin Elvis says it’s a game changer. BFR would be even more so. But this (from the story’s author) is a little silly:
Also, I feel like launching all of those rockets and processing the metals can’t be good for the environment.
The metals would be processed in space. The whole point of this is to start to move industry off the planet, which would be great for the environment. He should try thinking, and doing some actually analysis, rather than going on feels.
I agree that we have the tech to do this affordably, but I strenuously disagree with this:
The activities at this moon base would be focusing on science, as is the case in the Antarctic. It could provide an official U.S. government presence on the moon, and its motivation would be rooted in U.S. national policy—again as are the U.S. Antarctic bases.
To the degree that the focus should be on “science,” it should be about better learning how to live on the moon, and Antarctica is a terrible precedent, in that we aren’t allowed to exploit it for its resources. That’s also why the Outer Space Treaty itself, which was modeled on the Antarctic Treaty, is a problem.
I just finished an essay on space visions, including Krafft Ehricke. I forgot to include lunettas and solettas, but I’ll get a chance to take another whack at it, since it’s been delayed until the spring issue of The New Atlantis.