/sci/ - Science & Math

Why do spoons look pretty much the same as spoons two thousand years ago? They work and there’s nothing to add.

>>10068756
they engineered it to perfection during the apollo program. if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, especially if any malfunction would cause a horrific death

anyhow they did develop quite a bit between the early missions and the apollo program

>>10068763
It's kind of bulky. I realize it's bulky because it needs to maintain a constant volume, but couldn't we design something slimmer and lighter?

We need space battles so we can make advancements in this shit. Why haven't we had any wars in space yet? Do you know how many fucking advanced spacecraft designs we'd have by now? How cheap space flight would be? How lightweight and easy to operate the eva suits would be?

Why can't the US and Russia just agree to have a space war? It'd honestly be better for mankind in the long run.

>>10068877
Wait until the Resource Wars later in this century, then we’ll get fun stuff.

>>10068877 >>10068756
Reason #1:
Boomers afraid of change

SpaceX & Blue Origin made new suits.
But NASA think it's too risky to even test them.

>>10068756
No one is funding their development. Also US space suits are managed by ULA. So....
>>10068877
>>space battles
It's all fun and games until a Kessler syndrome gets started. You start shooting up stuff in orbit then the stuff you shot at becomes projectiles themselves, and then we can practically put anything into orbit for a very long time... So current plans for space wars call for satellites with robotic arms to fly close to the other military's satellites all the time. Then when there is war they fly up to the satellite and disable it using their arms to break solar panels and radio dishes. This can be done in a way that no debris is generated. That's what space war is gonna look like, no spacesuits, no people, no battleships, no stations, just satellites brawling with other satellites in slow motion
>>10068903
For use inside the spaceship, not for EVA.

>>10068914
Reason #2:
Lack of enough investment

US budget for NASA is shrinking since Challenger SpaceBus explosion.

General Public & politicians think that Space Exploration is a waste of money.

Leftist wanna feed 3rd world instead.
While Right Wing despise Science.
(I'm centrist by the way)


>>10068877 >>10068756

>>10068922
>Leftist
Leftists*

I'm not saying that solving World Society Problems are not important.

But every one in /sci/ knows that NASA brought technological progress with benefit our lives in long run, rather than in short sight.

Firefighter Gear
LED Lamps & Screens
Satellites (for GPS & Telecom)
Water Purification
Better Software
Pollution Remediation
Structural Analysis
etc. would not be possible without NASA fags

>>10068922 (You)
>Leftist
Leftists*

I'm not saying that solving World Society Problems are not important.

But every one in /sci/ knows that
NASA brought technological progress
which benefit our lives in long run, r
ather than in short sight.

Firefighter Gear (from the Suit)
LED Lamps & Screens
Satellites (for GPS & Telecom)
Water Purification
Better Software
Pollution Remediation
Better Aircraft Structures
etc. would not be possible without NASA fags

>>10068877
>Why can't the US and Russia just agree to have a space war? It'd honestly be better for mankind in the long run.
sad but kinda true. can we keep nukes out of it?

>>10068914
>>10068936
It'd have to be a gentleman's agreement. That robots would not be used to kill human beings, and it would be purely for badass fighting shit and the advancement of man kind.

But also extremely competitive, like the country to get the most kills in space wins after like 3 years, then we can take a break. Whoever wins controls space.

>>10068756
It works.

>>10068940
That ain't happening at all. There is currently no reason to send human beings into space for military purposes

>>10068922
>US budget for NASA is shrinking since Challenger SpaceBus explosion.
It didn't start going back down until 1994, so 8 years later. It actually went up for those 8 years.

>>10068756
Keep up with the times, anon. Pic. related.

>>10068933
Kill all third worlders. Problems solved.

>>10068990
this.
the final solution

>>10068771
That's a Gemini era suit, though.

>>10068978
Hot

>>10068978 >>10069041
Evangelion suit?

>>10068978
>>10069041

>>10068978
>>10069041
>>10069059

Tight so hot.

>>10068922
>US budget for NASA is shrinking since Challenger

Wrong, NASA budget is roughly constant ever since the end of Apollo.

>>10069077
You are not considering inflation.

>>10068877
Its not physically possible to fight in orbit without serious consequences. no one would risk the fall out and its too expensive to send soldiers up for every battle or even drones.

>>10069082
Yes I know it's unrealistic, it's just unfortunate.

>>10069079
Inflation is considered, read the axis label

>>10069077
How much of that is for space, though? Is that constant, or is more going towards other endeavors under the NASA umbrella?

Asking sincerely, I have no idea.

>>10069092
almost all of it goes towards space in some manner, more than half goes towards manned spaceflight and associated programs

>>10069092
it is for space in theory, in reality lots of it goes towards jobs programs and corporate welfare that pretend to be about spaceflight (SLS, Orion, JWST..)

the reason why Apollo was successful is that it takes some years for corruption to seep in, and in the early days NASA indeed was about advancing spaceflight and achieving the mission, as was its original goal

>>10069109
>almost all of it goes towards space in some manner,
space sjw furry degenerate astronauts

>>10069109
>>10069122
Depends on what you define as being "fr space."

Here's a budget document that would allow folks to answer their own questions:

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/fy_2018_budget_estimates.pdf

>>10069492
Your clumsy photoshop has caused me to rethink everything.