Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Last Flight Out

brr.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 322 posts

Re: Last Flight Out

#101

Post by JumpCrisscross »

orlp wrote: post #91
lxgr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once inter-satellite links are operational, presumably. Looking at [1], there are already some polar orbit satellites, but without these links, that doesn't help Antarctica much. (I'm also not sure if the polar satellites are operational for regular traffic yet.) [1] https://satellitemap.space/

Can someone explain to me how you can have geostationary orbit around the poles?

> Can someone explain to me how you can have geostationary orbit around the poles?

You can't. For high latitudes you use highly-elliptical orbits, like tundra or Molniya.

Re: Last Flight Out

#102

Post by fragmede »

ratg13 wrote: post #95
seanw444 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also limited fuel that they have to conserve, so infinite snow does not mean infinite water.

Seems like a decent opportunity to use a nuclear reactor .. something like what you would find on a submarine.

It was tried! http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph241/reid2/

Re: Last Flight Out

#103

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #98
localplume wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Precious space? Its a pretty big continent.

> Precious space? Its a pretty big continent That you can't farm on. The farmable bits are in protected, heated shelters that are expensive to build and maintain.

It's roughly a million times easier to grow food on the South Pole than it is to grow it on Mars.

Re: Last Flight Out

#104

Post by quickthrowman »

ratg13 wrote: post #95
seanw444 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also limited fuel that they have to conserve, so infinite snow does not mean infinite water.

Seems like a decent opportunity to use a nuclear reactor .. something like what you would find on a submarine.

We already tried that 60 years ago in Greenland, it didn’t end well.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Iceworm

Re: Last Flight Out

#105

Post by JumpCrisscross »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #103
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Precious space? Its a pretty big continent That you can't farm on. The farmable bits are in protected, heated shelters that are expensive to build and maintain.

It's roughly a million times easier to grow food on the South Pole than it is to grow it on Mars.

> a million times easier to grow food on the South Pole than it is to grow it on Mars

And it's a million easier still to import it. So apart from hydroponics for treats and research, it's not a problem worth solving.

Re: Last Flight Out

#107

Post by jjtheblunt »

ryandrake wrote: post #85

Whenever I read about how humans are about to colonize Mars, I think about how much logistics it takes to keep even a single base with a handful of people populated on the South Pole. It's like Mars, but with plentiful oxygen and atmospheric pressure, plentiful (albeit frozen) water, shielded from radiation, low-latency communication with civilization, and is reachable by air and ground vehicles. Given how difficult…

i think your observation is excellent.

but the entire Mars thing, the last several years, smells like Elon Musk trying to drum up interest to force government funding that he hopes to channel his way.

Re: Last Flight Out

#108

Post by fragmede »

zbaxrl wrote: post #56

Another blog, about the french-italian base Concordia. https://www.gdargaud.net/Antarctica/WinterDC1.html

In years past there was also ABigDeadPlace.com, which has since lapsed due to the author's unfortunate death. Thankfully it was published as a book, _Big Dead Place: Inside the Strange and Menacing World of Antarctica_ by Nicholas Johnson. If brr.fyi strikes your fancy, I bet that book would as well.

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/40919

Re: Last Flight Out

#109

Post by clarkema »

goldenchrome wrote: post #66
pavlov wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently not great if you're a woman: https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/02/as-antarctic-fieldwo...

[flagged]

We enforce rules in our society because they make that society better. Basic shared rules of behaviour are a precondition for social cohesion and prosperity, _not_ a luxury that we can only afford when everything else has been taken care of. This goes 10x in small groups in rigorous environments.

I wouldn't call resources in the Antarctic winter "incredibly scarce"; expeditions have been wintering South for decades now. We know what's required, and it's available, in quantity, with backups. It's true that people are trapped together for months at a time; we also rely on each other for survival. Under such circumstances, it's entirely backwards to claim "local society can't afford to have such strict standards." Just the opposite; strict standards of social behaviour are _required_ for the group cohesion and trust that's necessary for collaboration and survival.

A candidate who demonstrated this attitude would never get through BAS' hiring process. If, by some mischance, they did manage to make it South, they certainly wouldn't be overwintering.

Source: Wintered in Antarctica. Did not regress to the state of a caveman clad in penguin skins, nor did I become "prone to sexually harassing women."

Post reply on HN