All,

I've just copied and started to read a study by NASA on all aspects of space settlements. It was updated as recently as 1999, so at least a few people at NASA are keeping the flame alive. Studies like this, IMO, should be used as a basis for additional and discussions so that we don't plow over old territory and can make genuine progress. Has anyone else read this study and if so, do they have comments? This study has excellent references and appendixes and includes 225 pages of data, so it amounts to an excellent reference book that is far from light reading.

http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/SpaceSettlement/75SummerStudy/Table_of_Contents1.html

Cheers,

Tom Tucker

I've just copied and started to read a study by NASA on all aspects of space settlements. It was updated as recently as 1999, so at least a few people at NASA are keeping the flame alive. Studies like this, IMO, should be used as a basis for additional and discussions so that we don't plow over old territory and can make genuine progress. Has anyone else read this study and if so, do they have comments? This study has excellent references and appendixes and includes 225 pages of data, so it amounts to an excellent reference book that is far from light reading.

http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/SpaceSettlement/75SummerStudy/Table_of_Contents1.html

Cheers,

Tom Tucker

Yes, we have list member Al Globus to thank for this resource being
available on the web.

Those who advocate settlements on the surface of Mars glide along serene in
their assurance that such settlements could be built more cheaply than
orbital settlements. I think they can only continue believing this because
there has never been a study of a Mars settlement of comparable rigor to the
Ames orbital settlement study.

Regards,

Mike Combs

From: Tom Tucker (Olympia) [mailto:tntucker@...]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 1:32 AM
To: spacesettlers@egroups.com
Subject: [spacesettlers] NASA Design Study on Space Settlements

All,

I've just copied and started to read a study by NASA on all aspects of space
settlements.

http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/SpaceSettlement/75SummerStudy/Table_of_Contents
1.html
s1.html>

Those who advocate settlements on the surface of Mars glide along serene in their assurance that such settlements could be built more cheaply than orbital settlements. I think they can only continue believing this because there has never been a study of a Mars settlement of comparable rigor to the Ames orbital settlement study.

Regards,
Mike Combs
From:
Tom Tucker (Olympia) [mailto:tntucker@...]
Sent:
Sunday, January 21, 2001 1:32 AM
To:
spacesettlers@egroups.com
Subject:
[spacesettlers] NASA Design Study on Space Settlements
All,

I've just copied and started to read a study by NASA on all aspects of space settlements.

http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/SpaceSettlement/75SummerStudy/Table_of_Contents1.html

-- NASA SP-428
-- NASA SP-509
I've also heard about a tourist study: NP-1998-02-11-MSFC that may bevery important.
If we could get these digitized and converted to HTML (a fair amountof work), we could put them on the web site. There are people working(slowly) on the first two NASA studies. Help would be appreciated.
Also, if you know any 6-12th grade kids who like space, see:
http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/SpaceSettlement/Contest/
"Tom Tucker (Olympia)" wrote:
All,

I'vejust copied and started to read a study by NASA on all aspects of spacesettlements. It was updated as recently as 1999, so at least a few peopleat NASA are keeping the flame alive. Studies like this, IMO, should beused as a basis for additional and discussions so that we don't plow overold territory and can make genuine progress. Has anyone else read thisstudy and if so, do they have comments? This study has excellentreferences and appendixes and includes 225 pages of data, so it amountsto an excellent reference book that is far from light reading.

http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/SpaceSettlement/75SummerStudy/Table_of_Contents1.html

Cheers,

TomTucker

Al Globus
aglobus@..., (650) 604-4404
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/~globus/home.html
The dinosaurs weren't spacefaring. We are. I don't think that's an accident.
Maybe we are life's taxi to the stars.
I think we should:
1. Devote half of NASA's budget ($7 billion) to reaching NASA's 2020goal of
reducing launch costs to Low-Earth-Orbit to $220/kg with a 0.01% failurerate.
This should enable space tourism. The resulting orbital hotels willneed to
develop efficient orbital life support and other necessary technologies.
2. Build orbital space colonies. The materials in the largest asteroidare
sufficient for orbital colonies with a combined surface area about500 times
greater than Earth's. Eros alone could make over ten thousand spacecolonies,
each with about about 10 square kilometers of 1g living area.
3. After a few generations of orbital living, people won't need theircolony
to be near Sol. Then small groups of colonies with populations in the
tens-of-thousands can set out on multi-decade journeys to nearbystars.
Except the launch goals, none of this is even a little bit official.

From: Al Globus [mailto:aglobus@...]

There are two other relevant NASA studies:

-- NASA SP-428
-- NASA SP-509

If we could get these digitized and converted to HTML (a fair amount of
work), we could put them on the web site. There are people working (slowly)
on the first two NASA studies. Help would be appreciated.

What kind of help do you need, Al? If scanning, consider me at your
disposal.

Regards,

Mike Combs

From:
Al Globus [mailto:aglobus@...]
There are two other relevant NASA studies:
-- NASA SP-428
-- NASA SP-509
If we could get these digitized and converted to HTML (a fair amount of work), we could put them on the web site. There are people working (slowly) on the first two NASA studies. Help would be appreciated.

What kind of help do you need, Al? If scanning, consider me at your disposal.

Regards,
Mike Combs