[extropy-chat] Re: Are dwarfs better for long duration spaceflight?

[Mike Lorrey]

--- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of David Lubkin
> ...
> > 
> > He proclaimed that spacecraft *must* be custom-built, and that it
> > would *never* be possible to mass-produce them. And yes, friends,
> > he really did mean *never*.
> 
> Surely your friend forgot about the Iridium constellation.  We
> build 73 of those.  

And someone like Davids friend would point out that Iridium was a
'failure' (though ignoring that it is still functioning and turning a
profit for the corporation that bought the assets of the original
company (and the only way for people to communicate in the mess of New
Orleans, currently)).

As he is an astronomer, it is understandable that he only pays
attention to orbiting observatories. You only need one of each type in
orbit at a time of these sorts, he is right there, provided each can
provide sufficient observation time to each of the worlds astronomers
that needs it. Thing is, the more observatories there are, the more
market there is for astronomers...

Of course, he is likely not aware of the plans for the Darwin Space
Interferometer Terrestrial Planet Finding Project, which would consist
of 6 separate spacecraft capable of resolving terrestrial planets,
within their primary's habitable zomes, within 25 parsecs from Earth.
The Mark 2 version of Darwin, which would be used to actually observe
terrestrial planetary surfaces and detect trace amounts of methane,
would have a similar constellation, though moving up from a 1.5 meter
mirror size to 7.5 meter mirror size for each spacecraft.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
Founder, Constitution Park Foundation:
http://constitutionpark.blogspot.com
Personal/political blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs