Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #600337 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-10-10 21:29 -0400 |
| Last post | 2016-10-18 11:15 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 297 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-10-10 21:29 -0400
A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 18:49 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 08:45 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-10-11 14:57 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 10:21 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 18:54 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-10-11 19:05 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 12:37 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2016-10-11 22:56 +0300
the static eventuality noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 09:55 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 10:13 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 18:56 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 12:44 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 21:46 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-11 19:46 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:18 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:19 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:59 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-11 19:10 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 19:19 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-11 20:51 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-11 20:50 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:58 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:23 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:09 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:42 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:03 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:40 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:20 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:26 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:15 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 19:05 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:13 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 13:36 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 11:02 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 12:40 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:21 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:53 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:36 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 18:54 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:49 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:10 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:07 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:39 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-16 22:13 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:27 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:21 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:46 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 08:45 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 17:18 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 21:44 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 07:14 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 08:23 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:10 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 23:48 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:09 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 18:03 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:27 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:14 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 17:52 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:28 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:10 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:44 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:25 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 18:29 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:17 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 20:00 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 05:19 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 05:51 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 14:03 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 23:40 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:30 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 10:01 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:45 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 20:49 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 05:28 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:48 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 23:45 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:48 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 10:07 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 07:15 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 09:02 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 16:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-19 19:38 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 19:27 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 18:57 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:08 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 12:15 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 02:37 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 21:02 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 05:23 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:11 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:17 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 23:54 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:52 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:07 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:50 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:50 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:16 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:45 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:05 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:43 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:22 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 19:20 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 11:27 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:47 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:48 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-12 01:21 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:53 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-12 19:18 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 16:02 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:06 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 06:26 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:01 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:14 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 18:07 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:35 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:50 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 23:54 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:21 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 07:12 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 06:50 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 17:00 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 23:47 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:31 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 12:16 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-10-17 13:40 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:24 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:58 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-12 02:36 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 21:01 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:56 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 14:12 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:49 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:06 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 19:45 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:08 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 11:48 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:42 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-12 00:38 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 08:59 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 07:18 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 14:14 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:52 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:13 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 20:02 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 21:18 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 08:05 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-13 09:38 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:06 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-13 21:26 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 02:51 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:01 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 07:25 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 07:29 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 10:20 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:30 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:48 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 14:09 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 18:57 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:08 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:57 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:16 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:11 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 14:53 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:04 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:02 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:18 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:23 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-16 15:00 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-16 19:30 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 00:00 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-16 20:17 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 05:28 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-17 07:15 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:13 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:53 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 06:47 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 16:50 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 18:09 -0700
tensegrity ... TensegritoY noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 18:46 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 20:58 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:03 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:52 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:01 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 09:51 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:34 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 08:06 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 01:54 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:30 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:11 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 21:40 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 02:57 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:30 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:14 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 19:11 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 23:28 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 19:59 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 02:23 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 04:07 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:29 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:19 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 16:54 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:14 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-18 12:19 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:15 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:37 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:45 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:17 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 07:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-16 09:17 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-16 18:36 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:48 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:42 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:27 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:19 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-10-17 13:40 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:21 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-18 08:42 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:16 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 08:00 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-14 10:21 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 09:47 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:28 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:18 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:20 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:56 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:09 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2016-10-15 16:17 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-15 20:00 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:39 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:02 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:24 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 08:57 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:46 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 17:56 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 17:41 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 21:18 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:53 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-13 13:28 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 10:50 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-14 13:17 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 02:40 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:21 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2016-10-15 21:09 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 23:04 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:47 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:03 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:29 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:25 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-10-16 18:36 +0100
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-10-14 20:08 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 04:00 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:20 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:34 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 20:42 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-12 21:23 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 09:38 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 09:37 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 02:04 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:44 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-13 02:00 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 07:42 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-13 08:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 00:14 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-14 06:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 12:27 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:28 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-14 21:26 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 03:34 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-15 10:25 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2016-10-15 19:28 +0200
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:23 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:22 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:21 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-15 18:38 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 22:17 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-17 09:07 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 13:29 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-17 18:38 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 20:28 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 00:58 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Vaughn Simon <vaughnsimon@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 08:12 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-18 17:24 +0000
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 17:38 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 16:32 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-19 13:43 -0500
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-10-19 16:32 -0400
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 19:00 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 18:48 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-10-11 13:34 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-11 21:48 +0000
A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 16:19 -0700
Re: A smaller, faster version of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System to Mars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-10-18 11:15 -0400
Page 2 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 15 Next page →
| From | Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-11 20:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ntk1ed$smd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #600497 |
On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : > On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... >> >>> no food, no water, no air. >> >> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) > > conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. >> and again a CO2 >> atmosphere. Food could be grown. > > all moisture would leave the plant. > Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants. > Radiation will kill it off in a few years. You would do so in pressurized greenhouses. It can be done. Alain Fournier
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-11 20:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ntk4sd$ha1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #600503 |
On 10/11/2016 7:51 PM, Alain Fournier wrote: > On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote : >> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: >>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... > >>> >>>> no food, no water, no air. >>> >>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions) >> >> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable. > > Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture. but very little of it. > >>> and again a CO2 >>> atmosphere. Food could be grown. >> >> all moisture would leave the plant. >> Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants. >> Radiation will kill it off in a few years. > > You would do so in pressurized greenhouses. It can be done. > the greenhouse would be the equivelent of a large tank and the light would be dim due to outside dust. What atmosphere would you use ? you take up N2, must have that for breathing anyway. Plants cannot live on CO2 alone. They get their bulk from more solid substances like water and organic matter. This organic matter comes from decomposing plants and animals or from man made fertilizers. Too high a concentration of CO2 causes a reduction of photosynthesis in certain of plants. There is also evidence from the past of major damage to a wide variety of plants species from a sudden rise in CO2 (See illustrations below). Higher concentrations of CO2 also reduce the nutritional quality of some staples, such as wheat. > > Alain Fournier >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-11 20:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <vocrvb9lsppcf8fc3qbe0nmam876rs1aon@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #600507 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/11/2016 7:51 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:
>> On Oct/11/2016 at 8:19 PM, Serigo wrote :
>>> On 10/11/2016 6:10 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
>>>> In article <ntiqdi$7gt$3@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says...
>>
>>>>
>>>>> no food, no water, no air.
>>>>
>>>> There is a bit of water on Mars (e.g. polar regions)
>>>
>>> conjecture, not proven and so little, unusable.
>>
>> Well, let's say it is a very strong conjecture.
>
>but very little of it.
>
Wrong again, bucko. There are trillions of acre-feet of water
available as ices on Mars.
>>
>>>> and again a CO2
>>>> atmosphere. Food could be grown.
>>>
>>> all moisture would leave the plant.
>>> Not enough CO2 or atmosphereic pressure to support any plants.
>>> Radiation will kill it off in a few years.
>>
>> You would do so in pressurized greenhouses. It can be done.
>>
>
> the greenhouse would be the equivelent of a large tank and the light
>would be dim due to outside dust.
>
Wrong.
>
>What atmosphere would you use ?
>
Whatever one I wanted.
>
>you take up N2, must have that for breathing anyway.
>
Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the
oxygen.
>
>Plants cannot live on CO2 alone. They get their bulk from more solid
>substances like water and organic matter. This organic matter comes from
>decomposing plants and animals or from man made fertilizers.
>
So?
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 05:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4vt0dd-dap.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #600529 |
In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: <snip> > Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the > oxygen. We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen. Breathing pure oxygen is generally bad for humans. http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/why-does-breathing-pure-oxygen-kill-you -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 13:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pv5tvb1irllibv5jee2bc7r5mhjeiqcmo4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #600547 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the
>> oxygen.
>
>We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
>
And what we breath out has the same amount of nitrogen in it, so you
don't need any more but to replace leakage. And nothing says you HAVE
to use nitrogen for the inert component of atmosphere or that you have
to run 15 psi.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 17:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ntme9i$a00$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #600615 |
On 10/12/2016 3:09 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>> Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the >>> oxygen. >> >> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen. >> > > And what we breath out has the same amount of nitrogen in it, so you > don't need any more but to replace leakage. And nothing says you HAVE > to use nitrogen for the inert component of atmosphere or that you have > to run 15 psi. > > what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? N2 is the only practical one. and you have to take a lot of it, all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 17:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <gchtvbtveqe614485ngtmcbbnub2qc5c6b@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #600628 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/12/2016 3:09 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>>> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the
>>>> oxygen.
>>>
>>> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
>>>
>>
>> And what we breath out has the same amount of nitrogen in it, so you
>> don't need any more but to replace leakage. And nothing says you HAVE
>> to use nitrogen for the inert component of atmosphere or that you have
>> to run 15 psi.
>>
>
>what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ?
>
You can use anything you like, as long as it's non-toxic. Or you can
use nothing at all.
>
>N2 is the only practical one.
>
No, but it's probably the simplest and cheapest.
>
>and you have to take a lot of it,
>
Not really. After all, it's not consumed so you really just need
enough to fill the people spaces plus a little left over for 'make up
gas'. There's nitrogen on Mars, so you don't need to haul it all in.
Or you could just use pure oxygen, if you're willing to accept the
fire danger.
>
>all in *high pressure heavy* tanks.
>
Oh, don't be silly.
>
>do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ?
>
You don't absolutely need an inert gas, but you could just take both
the nitrogen and argon out of the Martian atmosphere and use that. Or
you could get nitrogen from nitrogenous regolith.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 19:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ntml60$hiv$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #600642 |
On 10/12/2016 7:03 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: > Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > >> On 10/12/2016 3:09 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> <snip> >>>> >>>>> Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the >>>>> oxygen. >>>> >>>> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen. >>>> >>> >>> And what we breath out has the same amount of nitrogen in it, so you >>> don't need any more but to replace leakage. And nothing says you HAVE >>> to use nitrogen for the inert component of atmosphere or that you have >>> to run 15 psi. >>> >> >> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? >> > > You can use anything you like, as long as it's non-toxic. wrong criteria. name a gas, and I will show you the problems with it. > Or you can > use nothing at all. you have to use something, nothing is pure O2 and that makes plastics into explosives. > >> >> N2 is the only practical one. >> > > No, but it's probably the simplest and cheapest. if no, name a gas. > >> >> and you have to take a lot of it, >> > > Not really. After all, it's not consumed so you really just need > enough to fill the people spaces plus a little left over for 'make up > gas'. There's nitrogen on Mars, it is a rare gas on Mars, less than 0.002% so you are going to haul up an air liquifying plant to Mars ? > so you don't need to haul it all in. > Or you could just use pure oxygen, if you're willing to accept the > fire danger. cannot use pure O2, google Apollo 1 fire. and try to keep up, more reading of books > >> >> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. >> > > Oh, don't be silly. what does N2 come in ? > >> >> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ? >> > > You don't absolutely need an inert gas, if it is not inert, the gas reacts with materials, and people you dont seem to know much. ... > but you could just take both > the nitrogen and argon out of the Martian atmosphere and use that. Or > you could get nitrogen from nitrogenous regolith. such as... try naming them there are no piles of bat shit on Mars.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 01:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <6343dd-b93.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #600646 |
In sci.physics Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > On 10/12/2016 7:03 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >> >>> On 10/12/2016 3:09 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: >>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> >>>>> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> <snip> >>>>> >>>>>> Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the >>>>>> oxygen. >>>>> >>>>> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen. >>>>> >>>> >>>> And what we breath out has the same amount of nitrogen in it, so you >>>> don't need any more but to replace leakage. And nothing says you HAVE >>>> to use nitrogen for the inert component of atmosphere or that you have >>>> to run 15 psi. >>>> >>> >>> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? >>> >> >> You can use anything you like, as long as it's non-toxic. > > wrong criteria. name a gas, and I will show you the problems with it. > >> Or you can >> use nothing at all. > > you have to use something, nothing is pure O2 and that makes plastics > into explosives. Breathing oxygen in high concentrations is generally harmfull to humans. http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/why-does-breathing-pure-oxygen-kill-you You HAVE to cut it with something. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 21:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1q2uvbliqtpcvf8fe057sqoomncsigdsj7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #600652 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 10/12/2016 7:03 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/12/2016 3:09 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the
>>>>>>> oxygen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And what we breath out has the same amount of nitrogen in it, so you
>>>>> don't need any more but to replace leakage. And nothing says you HAVE
>>>>> to use nitrogen for the inert component of atmosphere or that you have
>>>>> to run 15 psi.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> You can use anything you like, as long as it's non-toxic.
>>
>> wrong criteria. name a gas, and I will show you the problems with it.
>>
>>> Or you can
>>> use nothing at all.
>>
>> you have to use something, nothing is pure O2 and that makes plastics
>> into explosives.
>
>Breathing oxygen in high concentrations is generally harmfull to humans.
>
Only if you're stupid enough to breath it at excessive pressures.
>
>http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/why-does-breathing-pure-oxygen-kill-you
>
>You HAVE to cut it with something.
>
No, you don't. From your own cite, the problems occur when you have
oxygen partial pressures of 0.5 bars (around 7.25 psi) or higher. Note
that these problems will occur when you get to those sorts of O2
partial pressures whether you have 'cut the O2' with something else or
not.
Normal partial pressures of O2 in the atmosphere are around 3 psi. A
3 psi pure oxygen atmosphere won't hurt you, since it's the same
partial pressure of O2 that you get at sea level on Earth. Pretty
much ALL US space missions before the Shuttle (the exception is
Skylab) were flown with pure O2 atmospheres.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 08:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.326944f3a305a97c989837@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #600666 |
In article <1q2uvbliqtpcvf8fe057sqoomncsigdsj7@4ax.com>, fjmccall@gmail.com says... > No, you don't. From your own cite, the problems occur when you have > oxygen partial pressures of 0.5 bars (around 7.25 psi) or higher. Note > that these problems will occur when you get to those sorts of O2 > partial pressures whether you have 'cut the O2' with something else or > not. > > Normal partial pressures of O2 in the atmosphere are around 3 psi. A > 3 psi pure oxygen atmosphere won't hurt you, since it's the same > partial pressure of O2 that you get at sea level on Earth. Pretty > much ALL US space missions before the Shuttle (the exception is > Skylab) were flown with pure O2 atmospheres. > And Skylab used a 74-percent oxygen and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at 5 pounds per square inch (versus 14.7 pounds per square inch on Earth). Cite: http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm So you do *not* need a "breathable" atmosphere that is mostly N2. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 19:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <odqtvb5egqbgki838ro4odk20gkp195fm3@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #600646 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 10/12/2016 7:03 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/12/2016 3:09 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the
>>>>>> oxygen.
>>>>>
>>>>> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And what we breath out has the same amount of nitrogen in it, so you
>>>> don't need any more but to replace leakage. And nothing says you HAVE
>>>> to use nitrogen for the inert component of atmosphere or that you have
>>>> to run 15 psi.
>>>>
>>>
>>> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ?
>>>
>>
>> You can use anything you like, as long as it's non-toxic.
>>
>
>wrong criteria. name a gas, and I will show you the problems with it.
>
No, it's exactly the right criteria. Argon.
>
>> Or you can
>> use nothing at all.
>
>you have to use something, nothing is pure O2 and that makes plastics
>into explosives.
>
Ridiculous claim. What do you think they make oxygen masks out of?
>
>>
>>>
>>> N2 is the only practical one.
>>>
>>
>> No, but it's probably the simplest and cheapest.
>
>if no, name a gas.
>
Helium.
>
>>
>>>
>>> and you have to take a lot of it,
>>>
>>
>> Not really. After all, it's not consumed so you really just need
>> enough to fill the people spaces plus a little left over for 'make up
>> gas'. There's nitrogen on Mars,
>>
>
>it is a rare gas on Mars, less than 0.002% so you are going to haul up
>an air liquifying plant to Mars ?
>
Oh, don't be stupid. Nitrogen is 2.7% of the Martian atmosphere.
There are also minerals that are over 25% nitrogen by weight.
>
>> so you don't need to haul it all in.
>> Or you could just use pure oxygen, if you're willing to accept the
>> fire danger.
>
>cannot use pure O2, google Apollo 1 fire.
>
>and try to keep up, more reading of books
>
That was only because they were doing a ground test, which meant they
had pure oxygen at over 15 PSI. Pure oxygen was used for Mercury,
Gemini, and Apollo, both before and after the Apollo 1 fire.
and try to keep up, learn some actual facts.
>
>>
>>>
>>> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, don't be silly.
>>
>
>what does N2 come in ?
>
The atmosphere. Various minerals.
>
>>
>>>
>>> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ?
>>>
>>
>> You don't absolutely need an inert gas,
>>
>
>if it is not inert, the gas reacts with materials, and people
>you dont seem to know much.
>
You don't need anything but oxygen. You don't seem to know much.
>...
>
>
>> but you could just take both
>> the nitrogen and argon out of the Martian atmosphere and use that. Or
>> you could get nitrogen from nitrogenous regolith.
>>
>
>such as... try naming them
>
Almost any silicate, for example. Lots of silicates on Mars.
>
>there are no piles of bat shit on Mars.
>
But there are apparently large piles of bat shit between your ears.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 08:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3269446650866a7b989836@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #600628 |
In article <ntme9i$a00$1@gioia.aioe.org>, invalid@invalid.com says... > > On 10/12/2016 3:09 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote: > > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > > > >> In sci.physics Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> <snip> > >> > >>> Really? You think we breath NITROGEN? Uh, no. We just use the > >>> oxygen. > >> > >> We use the oxygen but what we breath is 78% nitrogen. > >> > > > > And what we breath out has the same amount of nitrogen in it, so you > > don't need any more but to replace leakage. And nothing says you HAVE > > to use nitrogen for the inert component of atmosphere or that you have > > to run 15 psi. > > > > > > what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? > > N2 is the only practical one. > > and you have to take a lot of it, > > all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. > > do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ? Yes, already tested. Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere. It used a a 74-percent oxygen and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of the "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 13:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ntok8c$1stc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #600686 |
>> >> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? >> >> N2 is the only practical one. >> >> and you have to take a lot of it, >> >> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. >> >> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ? > > Yes, already tested. > > Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere. It used a a 74-percent oxygen > and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of the > "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. > > http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm > > Jeff > Great, that problem solved.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 11:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ntqvjd$1eq3$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #600746 |
On 10/13/2016 1:36 PM, Serigo wrote: > >>> >>> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? >>> >>> N2 is the only practical one. >>> >>> and you have to take a lot of it, >>> >>> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. >>> >>> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ? >> >> Yes, already tested. >> >> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere. It used a a 74-percent oxygen >> and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of the >> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. >> >> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm >> >> Jeff >> > > Great, that problem solved. ISS uses 14.7psi about 70% O2
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 12:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <VfadnaqgSO4Fl5zFnZ2dnUU7-bnNnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #600847 |
"Serigo" wrote in message news:ntqvjd$1eq3$1@gioia.aioe.org... > >On 10/13/2016 1:36 PM, Serigo wrote: >> >>>> >>>> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? >>>> >>>> N2 is the only practical one. >>>> >>>> and you have to take a lot of it, >>>> >>>> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. >>>> >>>> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ? >>> >>> Yes, already tested. >>> >>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere. It used a a 74-percent oxygen >>> and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of the >>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. >>> >>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm >>> >>> Jeff >>> >> >> Great, that problem solved. > >ISS uses 14.7psi about 70% O2 That's in accurate. It's about 78% N2 and 21% O2, the rest is Co2 and a few other gasses. They purposely made it as close to the Earth's standard ratio so that replicating experiments was easier. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-composition-of-breathing-air-in-ISS -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-16 09:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.326d48e12278ff31989843@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #600851 |
In article <VfadnaqgSO4Fl5zFnZ2dnUU7-bnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>, mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com says... > > "Serigo" wrote in message news:ntqvjd$1eq3$1@gioia.aioe.org... > > > >On 10/13/2016 1:36 PM, Serigo wrote: > >> > >>>> > >>>> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? > >>>> > >>>> N2 is the only practical one. > >>>> > >>>> and you have to take a lot of it, > >>>> > >>>> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. > >>>> > >>>> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ? > >>> > >>> Yes, already tested. > >>> > >>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere. It used a a 74-percent oxygen > >>> and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of the > >>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. > >>> > >>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm > >>> > >>> Jeff > >>> > >> > >> Great, that problem solved. > > > >ISS uses 14.7psi about 70% O2 > > That's in accurate. It's about 78% N2 and 21% O2, the rest is Co2 and a few > other gasses. > They purposely made it as close to the Earth's standard ratio so that > replicating experiments was easier. > https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-composition-of-breathing-air-in-ISS Earth standard at sea level. Denver Colorado is more like 12 psi, and I'd still consider that "earth standard". So the actual pressure is kind-of arbitrary. People live just fine at a range of pressures. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-16 19:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vd6dnQlOtraCk5nFnZ2dnUU7-L3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #601089 |
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message news:MPG.326d48e12278ff31989843@news.eternal-september.org... > >In article <VfadnaqgSO4Fl5zFnZ2dnUU7-bnNnZ2d@earthlink.com>, >mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com says... >> >> "Serigo" wrote in message news:ntqvjd$1eq3$1@gioia.aioe.org... >> > >> >On 10/13/2016 1:36 PM, Serigo wrote: >> >> >> >>>> >> >>>> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? >> >>>> >> >>>> N2 is the only practical one. >> >>>> >> >>>> and you have to take a lot of it, >> >>>> >> >>>> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. >> >>>> >> >>>> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ? >> >>> >> >>> Yes, already tested. >> >>> >> >>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere. It used a a 74-percent >> >>> oxygen >> >>> and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of >> >>> the >> >>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. >> >>> >> >>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm >> >>> >> >>> Jeff >> >>> >> >> >> >> Great, that problem solved. >> > >> >ISS uses 14.7psi about 70% O2 >> >> That's in accurate. It's about 78% N2 and 21% O2, the rest is Co2 and a >> few >> other gasses. >> They purposely made it as close to the Earth's standard ratio so that >> replicating experiments was easier. >> https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-composition-of-breathing-air-in-ISS > >Earth standard at sea level. Denver Colorado is more like 12 psi, and >I'd still consider that "earth standard". So the actual pressure is >kind-of arbitrary. People live just fine at a range of pressures. > >Jeff Ok now Jeff, you're just picking nits :-) Yes, you're right. The point being that Sergio was completely wrong. -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-18 08:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.326fe55ae528d62098984c@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #601175 |
In article <vd6dnQlOtraCk5nFnZ2dnUU7-L3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>, mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com says... > >> >>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere. It used a a 74-percent > >> >>> oxygen > >> >>> and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of > >> >>> the > >> >>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. > >> >>> > >> >>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm > >> >>> > >> >>> Jeff > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> Great, that problem solved. > >> > > >> >ISS uses 14.7psi about 70% O2 > >> > >> That's in accurate. It's about 78% N2 and 21% O2, the rest is Co2 and a > >> few > >> other gasses. > >> They purposely made it as close to the Earth's standard ratio so that > >> replicating experiments was easier. > >> https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-composition-of-breathing-air-in-ISS > > > >Earth standard at sea level. Denver Colorado is more like 12 psi, and > >I'd still consider that "earth standard". So the actual pressure is > >kind-of arbitrary. People live just fine at a range of pressures. > > > >Jeff > > Ok now Jeff, you're just picking nits :-) > Yes, you're right. The point being that Sergio was completely wrong. Agreed. I just thought it was worth pointing out that everyone on earth does not live on the shoreline, near sea level. Lots of people do (it is a convienent place to live), but not all. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 11:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <96920chn8gg8dnf2if9ksevm34954t0e8d@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #600847 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >On 10/13/2016 1:36 PM, Serigo wrote: >> >>>> >>>> what else are you going to use ? do you have any ideas ? >>>> >>>> N2 is the only practical one. >>>> >>>> and you have to take a lot of it, >>>> >>>> all in *high pressure heavy* tanks. >>>> >>>> do you have an alternate inert gas in mind ? >>> >>> Yes, already tested. >>> >>> Actually, look at the Skylab atmosphere. It used a a 74-percent oxygen >>> and 26-percent nitrogen breathing mixture at a mere 5 psi instead of the >>> "normal" 14.7 psi, which is earth sea level pressure. >>> >>> http://history.nasa.gov/SP-400/ch2.htm >>> >>> Jeff >>> >> >> Great, that problem solved. > >ISS uses 14.7psi about 70% O2 > Then they're all dead, since that would give a partial pressure of oxygen in excess of 9 psi. Hint: ISS air is 21% oxygen. The remainder is nitrogen.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web