Mars and the Moon
 

Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop

[Closed] Mars and the Moon

29 Posts
22 Users
0 Reactions
147 Views
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Should we go there ?

and more importantly when can we ride the first track there 😀
(just watched moon stuff on iplayer)


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:01 pm
 Nick
Posts: 607
Full Member
 

yeah we should go there, don't ask me why just seems like we should


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:03 pm
 Kuco
Posts: 7203
Full Member
 

Because we have never been their 😉


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:08 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Moon definitally, then we can easily fuel Nuclear Fussion.


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 3729
Free Member
 

Moon definitally, then we can easily fuel Nuclear Fussion.

Really, how will that work then?

Oh and yes to both.


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:11 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

It has a large source of tritium, which is used in the fusion process. This is the major reason the US are starting new moon missions. The shuttle holds just about the right amount to power America for a certain amount of time I cannot remember.


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:15 pm
Posts: 145
Free Member
 

Lifetime supply of cheese


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:18 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Yes, I want to meet that cooker with a truncheon.


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:19 pm
Posts: 3729
Free Member
 

Cool, well except that the shuttle can't go to the moon but that's not really relevant.


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:19 pm
Posts: 4660
Full Member
 

YES! Purely for the singletrack on Olympus Mons: 88000ft tall, no rain, no crowds, but sadly the uplift is a little costly and the lack of Oxygen may be a slight downer.

Does it really have oodles of tritium? Why?


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

[url] http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/19296/ [/url]


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:22 pm
Posts: 6707
Free Member
 

the entire human race will eventually become extinct if we stay here, what with the threats from the sun burning out, giant meteors, huge tsunamis, climate change (man made or otherwise), super-volcanoes and the like.


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:28 pm
Posts: 14
Free Member
 

the uplift is a little costly and the lack of Oxygen may be a slight downe

true, but the gravity at 1/6 of earth's should help even if you need the extra weight of a couple of oxygen bottles


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:31 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

we are going to the moon tomorrow for those interested
[url= http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROSS/lunarswingby/index.html ]moon flyby[/url]

[url=

me to the moon .....in other words.....yeah baby[/url]


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:31 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Keep away from the Moon ............. it's crawling with Nazis

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:45 pm
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

[i]Since tritium is highly radioactive[/i]

Aah great. So it's only a matter of time before a cheap assed space ship driven by a half crazy freighter pilot burns up in the atmosphere by accident and showers the entire globe in highly radioactive material.


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:54 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

erm sorry to break it to you samuri......its to late, see this thread i started earlier lol
[url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/excuse-me-ive-lost-my-35-tonne-nuclear-bomb ]did we drop something?[/url]


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 10:59 pm
Posts: 4660
Full Member
 

Since tritium is highly radioactive

5hit! Who let that cat out of the bag? I thought it was generally accepted within the educated cummunity that we weren't going to let on to the tree-hugging crusty club that nuclear fusion, just like fission, produces loads of radioactive waste. D'oh!


 
Posted : 22/06/2009 11:00 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Since tritium is highly radioactive

But as radioactivity goes, it's pretty weedy really...


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 12:02 am
Posts: 7981
Free Member
 

I don't think it's the tritium that causes the problem, instead the reactor itself becomes radioactive after some time. They've already commissioned a study into how they're going to get rid of the ITER reactor IIRC.


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 11:16 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Dump it in Cumbria 🙂


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 11:19 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Id suggest Yarmouth, it might improve the place


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 57
Free Member
 

at least moon-Nazis drive on the correct (left) side of the road.


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 1:07 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

There'd be LOTS of neutron radiation around a fusion reactor, you would not want to be around, remember neutron bombs, the ones that killed people rather than destroyed buildings?


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 1:30 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Oh and you can get the fuel for fusion reactors from the sea - so it would be a bit over the top to go to mars or the moon to "mine" it


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 1:31 pm
Posts: 3403
Free Member
 

The shuttle holds just about the right amount to power America for a certain amount of time I cannot remember.

Are you joking here? I can't quite tell.


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 919
Free Member
 

Didnt Wallace and Grommit go there already ?


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 3:05 pm
Posts: 17
Free Member
 

Tritium can easily be made by using lithium as the coolant around the reactor, in more than sufficient quantities - no need for the moon.

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 3:38 pm
Posts: 65987
Full Member
 

Once you've got reliable spaceflight, you can just fire your wastes into the sun anyway. Vitrify it on earth and lift it up in your space elevator.

I think we should be going... They should be viewed as stepping stones, getting back to the moon isn't an achievement in itself but it gives us better access to orbit (smaller gravity well- build factory on moon, build stuff on moon, launch into earth orbit) Zero gee and low gee have lots of manufacturing potential, not to mention the access to raw materials. Earth orbit is probably going to be more important than the moon itself in the long run though. And there's all sorts of socio-politico-technical reasons why it would be good.

Also, spaceships are awesome.


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 8302
Free Member
 

gonefishin - Member
Cool, well except that the shuttle can't go to the moon but that's not really relevant.

It can if it parks at the alien space port on the dark side.

See Alien Conspiracy Theory No 248 subsection 5........


 
Posted : 23/06/2009 7:36 pm