Venerian Sky Colonies

[Anonymous No.9784871]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus

In a nutshell
>Atmospheric pressure at 50km above surface is equal to 1 atmosphere, so no pressurization required like mars.
>Because of the contents of the atmosphere, breathable air mixture (21:79 O2:N2) is a floating gas like helium is on earth. This means that unpressurised air inside the colonies would provide the lift required for floatation
>While the planet does rotate upon its axis every 243 days, the upper atmosphere where the colonies would be located rotates around the planet once every 4 days.
>4 day expiditions could be sent out from the sky cities to retrieve rare metals and material to create water and oxygen from the surface of Venus
>Expansion of the colonies could happen from materials extracted from the surface of the planet
>Terraforming could be started while people live on the colonies

So, /sci/, why aren't we heading to venus? Other than the sulfuric acid problem (which can be solved easily with special carbon fluorine compound coating), Venus's atmosphere is by far the most habitable place in the solar system other than Earth itself. We should focus our efforts here instead of Mars.

[Anonymous No.9784883]

Let's not forget that Venus is also the closest to earth in terms of gravitational force with around .9g.

[Anonymous No.9785012]

it would be hard to get resources because of the high pressure can destroy probes, so basically you need to bring everything with you. mars however has easy access to metals, and water in the form of Ice gravity issues could be solved with a centrifuge environment, all that water could be used to make rocket fuel for the trip back

[Anonymous No.9785048]

>>9784871
Venusian, not Venerian.
>>So, /sci/, why aren't we heading to venus?
well for one, we have yet to launch and deploy any large scale balloon probes. Second, we need to better characterize the amount of wind shear and turbulence in the Venusian atmosphere at altitudes that could support people. If the wind shear and turbulence are too much for big balloons to handle, Venusian colonization won't be very practical.

>>carbon fluorine compound coating
also known as teflon TM
>>9785012
>>high pressure can destroy probes
every fucking thread about venus, someone thinks that pressure is destroys everything. Dealing with high pressure isn't hard. The easy way to deal with pressure is to have holes in everything so that everything is at the same pressure and there is nothing to crush. The harder way is to put stuff into pressure vessels. It's not hard to make small pressure vessels capable of withstanding this pressure. Most pressurized gas tanks can take internal pressures as high as this and it's way easier to make something that can take external pressures than internal pressures. James Cameron took a submarine to the bottom of the Mariana trench and that withstood an order of magnitude more pressure than the surface of Venus. The real problem is temperature. It's so hot that conventional silicon electronics don't work any more. But electronics based on silicon carbide are being developed which can handle the heat.

>> easy access to metals, and water in the form of Ice
not really. On mars, you have to dig for water. On venus you can extract it from the air. Plants for extracting stuff from the air are much more reliable than plants that dig stuff out of the ground.

[Anonymous No.9785089]

>>9785048
It really makes me salty that mars gets all the attention when Venus is just as-if not more-suitable for earth life. We send rovers to mars but we haven't launched balloons onto Venus yet because of the fear that we'll recreate cold war era Soviet mistakes.

It is my dream to set foot on a Venusian sky city one day. Its possible with technology we have today, but no one wants to fund it.

[Anonymous No.9785103]

>>9785089
We have launched balloons to venus, we need to launch more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_program#Balloon

>> because of the fear that we'll recreate cold war era Soviet mistakes.
nope, that'd be lack of funding. Also the new refocus of NASA on human missions is eating up all the money that was dedicated to planetary science, which among other things includes studying Venus.

>> Its possible with technology we have today
No it's not, we'd have to develop new technology to make it work. Second, until we have a better understanding of wind shear and turbulence on Venus, we don't know if sky cities are possible. The turbulence and shear could be common enough and great enough that sky cities don't stand a chance.

[Anonymous No.9785115]

how could probes be brought back up anyways?

[Anonymous No.9785118]

>>9785115
would a balloon pop a those temperatures?

[Anonymous No.9785127]

>>9785103
Ok you obviously know more about this than me. What would be an example of technological limitation? As far as I know the tech required can be developed within relatively short time if enough money is thrown at it.

>>9785118
At the proposed heights, the temperature may range from 0-50°c, very similar to some desert climates on earth.

[Anonymous No.9785131]

>>9785127
Wait I'm retarded I didnt see you quoted
>>9785115

[Anonymous No.9785230]

>>9785048
>On venus you can extract it from the air

That's kind of a fucking stretch. You can extract sulfuric acid from the air, which you can then convert into water by a high temperature chemical reaction. On Mars you dig up ice which is just below the surface, and melt it.

[Anonymous No.9785246]

It would be better to block out the sun and cool the planet down. Then you could land on the surface.

[Anonymous No.9785254]

Cloud cities are cool but let's do a practical comparison

>Fuckhuge floating city without easy access to pretty much all hard resources without sending robots down and flying it all back up

vs

>Find lava tube, seal holes and pressurise, dig water and resources straight from the ground outside


From an engineering perspective it is far easier to build in situ habitats on Mars.

[Anonymous No.9785319]

>>9784871
Not pheasible. Lando will just end up betraying you

[Anonymous No.9785350]

>>9785319

To be fair, Han had a lot of guts coming there after what he pulled.

[Anonymous No.9785386]

>>9785350
And what do you think the justification will be when Lando sells YOU out to the Empire?

[Anonymous No.9785569]

>>9785386

I'm sure Lando had no choice, the Empire no doubt arrived right before I did.

[Anonymous No.9785614]

>>9785569
Then it's clear that Lando is unwilling or unable to defend his people from outside interests

>Just say no to cloud cities

[Anonymous No.9786414]

Why does this planet receive so little attention compared to Mars?

[Anonymous No.9786422]

>>9786414
usa picked mars ussr picked venus.

[Anonymous No.9786544]

>>9784871
Main problem with Venus is that you can't get back.
You'd need to launch an entire rocket on an absurdly large additional rocket from earth to be able to return.

[Anonymous No.9786681]

>>9785103
>>9785048
if BFR actually delivers on its potential for $50 to $100 kg/LEO, there'll be new Venus missions just like there will be new Everywhere Missions

The solar system will probably be fucking buzzing with probes and satellites and rovers, 10+ per planet, before anyone ever sets a foot on Mars

[Anonymous No.9786751]

>>9785089
we could start funding it right now anon

[Anonymous No.9786855]

>>9784871
Why not Venus? It's got a comfy 10.4 m/s^2 compared to Venus's 8.87 or Mars's abysmal 3.7

[Anonymous No.9786882]

How rich Elon will be once Tesla reaches production output of Toyota and SpaceX deploys the entire Starlink?

[Anonymous No.9786891]

>>9786882
with Tesla alone, the recently passed compensation plan will net him $55,800,000,000 if the market cap increases as envisioned. Then starlink is aiming for 10% of the ISP market, which is about $20,000,000,000.

[Anonymous No.9786899]

>>9786681
Paid for by the magic money tree.

[Anonymous No.9786918]

>>9786544

Shit. Didn't think of that.

[Anonymous No.9786950]

>>9786899
the tree known as commercial economy
if it becomes dirt cheap to do space shit, everyone will want to toss their hat into the ring so they can draw dicks on every body in the solar system

[Anonymous No.9787804]

Bump

[Anonymous No.9789103]

We would need research stations long before colonies, and then we just keep expanding these stations with each rocket we send there. Say we had a station on Mars, the skies of Venus, and a moon of Jupiter, these stations could launch un-manned pods of resources at each other to keep each other supplied.

Venus has lots of Nitrogen and Carbon in it's air, and you need Nitrogen for plants and breathable air, so if Venus get's some sort of mass driver, it would be useful to the other colonies. It could just launch into space unmanned pods of nitrogen and carbon in trajectories that will bring it to Mars. Also, Venus lacks hydrogen, so the Jupiter colony would be able to send hydrogen in a similar manner to Venus and wherever else we need hydrogen.

So research stations come first, interplanetary trade comes after that, and only then would we consider building true colonies, because otherwise the colonies would severely lack something important. Mars doesn't really have anything we need, other than being a close planet to earth with a solid ground, we would need resources from Venus and Jupiter to really make a Mars colony viable.

[Anonymous No.9789448]

>>9786899
Paid for by the fact that all of that shit will cost less than current spaxe exploration, dumbass

[Anonymous No.9789456]

>>9789103
why do we need to take steps smaller than a baby on everything
build research stations, colonies, and mining all at once, all paid for by different people for different purposes

[Anonymous No.9789501]

>>9784871
does venus have an active magnetic core to shield from radiation?

[Anonymous No.9789644]

>>9789501

It has an atmosphere that does that.

[Anonymous No.9789650]

>>9789644
seriously? I thought magnetic cores were needed to generate protective field n shit

[Anonymous No.9789657]

>>9789650

Either works to keep radiation out.

[Anonymous No.9789774]

>>9789650

This is pretty much a meme. Atmosphere protects the surface from radiation, and the idea is that a magnetic field protects the atmosphere from being eroded by the solar wind. But this isn't by any means clear. Some modelling suggests that the Earth's magnetic field makes no difference to the rate of erosion, since it just concentrates solar wind onto the poles (hence aurora). In any case the erosion rate is absolutely tiny for Earth. It's not at all clear why Mars lost its atmosphere. Might have been low gravity combined with erosion, might have been something else.

[Anonymous No.9789792]

>>9784871
because it's not economical, theres no profit in going to venus