Nasa worth it? (thread split)

[Greatguardian]

Voice command computers are still a work in progress.

Natural language programming is hell. Pure, unadulterated hell.

I'll forgive them though because that was a TNG thing.

[Stanislaw]

Since the topic is starting to become a little stale, let's add some spice to the mix.

Does anyone know where Military's interests in space lie、and if so, by how much? I ask this because I read an article the other day somewhere that the US had plans to build a "Staff of God" in space, which is a space platform equipped with a gigantic metal rod that can be directed at targets on Earth with the use of a rocket. Then I saw the source being Chinese and kinda scoffed at it, but the prospect of those weapons alone frightens me tons.

[Greatguardian]

The military likes things that go boom. Aside from some sort of missile defense net or a BFG from space, I doubt they're very interested as they're plenty capable of blowing millions of dollars on things that go boom planet-side.

[Correction]

Since the topic is starting to become a little stale, let's add some spice to the mix.

Does anyone know where Military's interests in space lie、and if so, by how much? I ask this because I read an article the other day somewhere that the US had plans to build a "Staff of God" in space, which is a space platform equipped with a gigantic metal rod that can be directed at targets on Earth with the use of a rocket. Then I saw the source being Chinese and kinda scoffed at it, but the prospect of those weapons alone frightens me tons.

Imagine the time it would take such a weapon to reach its target....if we ever used it against countries that represented actual threats to the United States their nukes would atomize the West Coast before God's Penis could get within a hundred thousand miles of Beijing.

[Rhyis.]

Ion cannon up in this motherfucker. Rockets from space is a terrible idea.

[Greatguardian]

We do use Ion engines in unmanned space craft

[Stanislaw]

Imagine the time it would take such a weapon to reach its target....if we ever used it against countries that represented actual threats to the United States their nukes would atomize the West Coast before God's Penis could get within a hundred thousand miles of Beijing.

Didn't most ICBM's reach space altitudes anyway? With a space platform it would theoretically cut travel time by half (assuming it's directly above them and not halfway around the world). Of course, I'm probably ignoring so many aspects of aerodynamics and physics I can be proven wrong easily.

[Rhyis.]

But do we destroy Nod tanks with that same tech. Bitches be trippin'

[Greatguardian]

Ion engines aren't very powerful. Ion cannons would be even less effective. They're one of those things that sounds cool but doesn't work out in practice.

I mean, if you want to, like, sit down and direct an Ion cannon at a stationary target for a few hours it might heat up a little. That's about it, though.

[Rhyis.]

You make me cry. It's like watching that episode of Mythbuster's about Archimedes death ray all over again.

[Correction]

Didn't most ICBM's reach space altitudes anyway? With a space platform it would theoretically cut travel time by half (assuming it's directly above them and not halfway around the world). Of course, I'm probably ignoring so many aspects of aerodynamics and physics I can be proven wrong easily.

I just don't see how the uninterrupted and secure construction, maintenance and resupply of such a weapon makes God's Thrusting Cock a viable weapon. Nukes on supersonic stealth bombers just seem so much quicker and less error-prone by an order of magnitude.

[Greatguardian]

You make me cry. It's like watching that episode of Mythbuster's about Archimedes death ray all over again.

On the flip side, Ion engines are incredibly efficient and require very little (negligible) fuel. Because of the lack of friction in space, even minor acceleration from weak Ion engines will constantly increase your speed. It adds up.

[Stanislaw]

I just don't see how the uninterrupted and secure construction, maintenance and resupply of such a weapon makes God's Thrusting Cock a viable weapon. Nukes on supersonic stealth bombers just seem so much quicker and less error-prone by an order of magnitude.

The only benefit that I can think of is that such a weapon will be a 'green' weapon (non-nuclear) since what it essentially is is a mass-driver in a grand scale.

[Greatguardian]

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news...prop06apr99_2/

Also: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/about/fs21grc.html

[Stanislaw]

The biggest that makes me worry about Military involvement in space is the prospect of increased space debris (results of weaponized satellites fighting each other, for example), and if enough of them add up it just might be possible that humanity would be trapped on Earth forever since it'll be suicide to venture out.

Armored Core 4A, anyone? (I love the setting in that game, even if it's apocalyptic)

[Greatguardian]

In what way?

There's already a pretty good deal of debris out there. We just ignore it for the most part. Anything with a decaying orbit eventually burns up in the atmosphere anyways.

[Rhyis.]

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news...prop06apr99_2/

Nice article, even if it's old. Thanks.

[Greatguardian]

Yeah, the second article is slightly more recent. I'm trying to find the one an acquaintance of mine used in her class earlier this semester.

[Stanislaw]

In what way?

There's already a pretty good deal of debris out there. We just ignore it for the most part. Anything with a decaying orbit eventually burns up in the atmosphere anyways.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...arth_Orbit.png

Also remember they're traveling in orbit mighty fast. We can ignore it for the most part because they're all relatively small, but if anything larger goes into orbit, it's mighty deadly. Which will definitely happen when wars are fought in space.

[Greatguardian]

Nah, spacecraft aren't that fragile. They're built to take a beating. The scale is also a bit deceptive. The asteroid belt looks similarly dense, but NASA doesn't even bother plotting courses around it. They just shoot probes in a straight line. There's so much free space between asteroids in the belt that the chance of a probe or craft actually running into one of them is negligible.