Space Colonization

[Bustos]

And will vote against it, if this goes to a vote at all.

[Ranholn]

also one conventional outer atmospheric missle would take the entire station out by hitting it once cause rapid violent destabilisation
one 10 million bomb
kills one multi trillion doller sci fi fantasy

[Zimmerwald]

It's Myroria's choice if he wants to waste money on this sort of project.  It just makes it easier for others to point out his pie-in-the-sky policies instead of focusing on the day-to-day lives of his people.

Just joking.

Not really.

Well...you decide whether I am or not.

[Myroria]

An outer atmospheric missile reaching the moon? I don't think so. Not to mention it'd take three days even if it could, allowing me to blast it out of the sky. Nor does it cost trillions of dollars. Nor is it a fantasy.

[High Evermore]

Imma throw in my two cents lmao.

Listen, Space travel is nice, space colonization is too broad of a spectrum. The fact of the matter is that a standard ICBM can and does breach atmosphere, and with some more rocket fuel would hit your station and blow it off the moon. You're acting highly irrational about this whole colonization bit. For one, the technology to create a terraformed geo-dome would be so expensive that your country would have to be proficient in Nanotechnology, which is somewhere in the 100billions of dollars p/year. Ill probably have to check that and compare numbers to get a true to life estimate. Having a space station is not far fetched. I would vote yes on space stations and Orbital crafts, but not colonization. Its extremely unrealistic.

Now i know youre going to attack my airship designs as unrealistic, but look up the designs an compare them to the C-130. the only difference is the use of helium to create vertical lift, and rotary turboprops to create vertical and lateral propulsion. Its all completely feasible, and has already been developed in the US (Wiki search Hybrid Airships). If you give me pages of statistical information and characteristics of the colony that would prove that it could be done TODAY in an ACTUAL country, I would vote yes without a doubt.

And thats my 

[Myroria]

1. My geo-dome is not terraformed; it is just a large glass dome. Something like this:

Except with fiberglass, and on the moon.

2. I know ICBM's break the atmosphere when they attack, but that's exactly the reason they're intercontinental ballistic missiles, not interplanetary ballistic missiles. Making an arsenal fit for space is just as expensive, if not more, then a space colony. I'm not asking for a Clavius Base here. This is the basic colony. And, a space colony could very well be developed today, if NASA's budgets weren't cut all the time. I'm RPing the Imperial Aristocratic Aerospace Administration (IAAA) as the forefront of Taijitu's space programs; like the ESA or a well funded NASA. The idea is simple in effect; it starts with one small module maybe the size of a classroom, and more development ensues from there. That's completely realistic if you look at it. No nation today could make a space colony, but that's only because their funding is cut smaller and smaller. There is no doubt in my mind that if NASA had good funding, it could put a colony on the moon. No doubt in my mind.

3. Blowing a peaceful colony off of the moon is not good PR. What would the world think if China blew up a space shuttle with it's new weapons system? People would be pissed, and no country would think of doing it without good reason. But of course, people don't take into effect public relations. They automatically assume their country blindly supports the war no matter how many people die or how many innocent civilians are killed.

[Daimiaen]

so.....currently you have sent a rocket to the moon...that puts you about the same level as NASA in the mid sixties....yes?
They were claiming back then that there would be colonies on the moon as soon as the nineteen eighties....it's now many years later and they're claiming it will be done by 2040.....

So forty years after your first rocket you can make a claim that you will have a colony in another 30 odd years....how about that???

[Myroria]

I'm more advanced than NASA in the mid-sixties. We have already made a primitive nuclear propulsion rocket.

And NASA could easily have put a colony on the moon in the 1990's, but the government drastically cut their funding after the Apollo program. And then the Challenger caused NASA to go on a three year hiatus from doing anything.

EDIT: Three years, not twenty.

[High Evermore]

3. Blowing a peaceful colony off of the moon is not good PR. What would the world think if China blew up a space shuttle with it's new weapons system? People would be pissed, and no country would think of doing it without good reason. But of course, people don't take into effect public relations. They automatically assume their country blindly supports the war no matter how many people die or how many innocent civilians are killed.

China DID lauch a missile into space. It hit a satellite up there and the Chinese never told anyone about it, and the world was obviously pissed. Second, im not saying were going to blow up Omicron Persei Eight and all of your colonies, but im simply stating that. You may piss off alot of other countries. Im just mentioning an issue.

EDIT: I meant satellite instead of space station. Freudian slip XD

[Myroria]

I do not recall a space station ever being hit by a missile. China shot down one of it's own satellites with it's anti-satellite weapon, and Salyuz 2 was destroyed by the explosion of it's own rocket nearby, but no space station was ever shot down by China.

[Ranholn]

actually once you get out of the atmosphere its rather easy to make it aim at the moon, the challange is getting it to land, if you just want to bomb the moon its rather easy. you know why they arnt called InterPlanatary, cause its a stupid name we dont have any wars against other planets.

[Myroria]

1. An ICBM still couldn't reach Selene without plenty of warning. Attach a .50 calibur to a shuttle and send it into orbit. As you would put it:

One .50 calibur machine gun
destroys one 10 million dollar bomb.

But I know what you're going to say:

"BUT MYORIA, AN ICBM IS MADE OF METAL LOLOLO"

A .50 calibur is a very powerful gun. An ICBM is complicated and dependent on all systems working. Though the .50 calibur likely wouldn't blow a hole through it, just a bit of damage to any of it's system would blow it out of the sky. But don't make me do space warfare. That wouldn't be fun.

[Ranholn]

alot of modern guns dont work in space situations since hey use gravity feeds, trust me its not as easy as you think to shoot something moving at those speeds, why do you think interseption is a retarded missle defense system, but sadly one of the few

also a technical one, if you are posting an argument never use a 1 or an A with out having at least a 2 or a B to follow

[Myroria]

1. I was planning to add a 2 before I left to go eat.

2. Thanks for pointing that out, but all I would have to do is replace it with anything else that doesn't use a gravity feed and it's fine.

3. Yes, it is easy to shoot something at those speeds if you're going at roughly the same speed. When a space shuttle (Endeavour) is in orbit it goes 17,321 miles per hour. An ICBM (Minuteman III) goes roughly 15,000 miles per hour. That would have to be sped up for a trip to Selene.

4. Again, it'd take your ICBM three days to get to Selene, and my nuclear propulsion system (Which was developed DURING THE 1950's on Earth and would have gone into space if it wasn't for nuclear treaties) could get there in roughly 3 hours during cruising speed (again, developed during the 1950's, not future tech). And on that nuclear propulsion ship could be, say, a missile defense battery.

[Ranholn]

why wouldnt the person killling you just equip his own ships with N.Propulsion, and please link me credible sites says we had working ones in the 50's