Talk:Venusian Haven

Looks very interesting. About the POD - I believe it's theorised that it was the impact of a planetoid that gave Venus its slow rotation; perhaps rather than having another planetoid impact to rectify this, you could have the original planetoid fall into orbit to become Neith, the moon? Fegaxeyl 17:54, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

It is not that the moon had an unstable orbit, it's that it was rotating clockwise. Our moon, Luna, rotates counterclockwise, and so is slowly moving away from us, whereas Neith continually got closer until its orbit brought it too far into Venus' gravity well and it impacted.

Also, why is the article in Wikitext? Wikitext is absolutely evil, and makes editing a cruel labyrinth of difficulty, melancholy, and general f%@#ed-upedness.

Jazon Naparleon 16:43, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Ion propulsion system
I remember reading something on these propulsion systems that would be quite interesting for this TL. As I recall from a newspaper article, an American scientist theorised that, with an ion engine strong enough for it, planets, such as Mars, and for that matter Venus as well, could be reached in about 30-35 days. It would also reduce the amount of fuel necessary for the trip and thus increase the amount of payload the ship would be able to bring.--Vladivostok 10:00, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

So, I take it you didn't find this idea to be plausible?--Vladivostok 11:02, August 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * No, no, no, don't say that. I love the idea. Sorry, I haven't had time to answer, so please don't take it the wrong way. I love this idea, and I would love to incorporate it into this timeline. --NuclearVacuum 15:50, August 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Vladivostok, I beleive you are mistaken. Ion thrusters would be used in situations in which time is not crucial, due to their low thrust. They only go fast after a looooooooooooooooooonnnngggg time, because they are always accelerating, but do so at an astoundingly slow rate.
 * Jazon Naparleon 16:43, August 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I've read a couple of things on the Internet about it, and it says it is feasible for missions to the outer and inner solar system, as well as manned missions to Mars. It is cheaper and takes up less room, but the debilitating factor, as you already mentioned is thrus, and energy consumption. But the greater the energy used, the greater the thrust. Thus, a nuclear powered engine should probably have to be used, perhaps coupled with solar panels for some extra power. Generally, any of the electricily powered propulsion systems use ions as propellants. Since the early sixties, drives like the Hall effect thruster have been tested, and in this TL, with the discovery of Venus being a habitable planet, it can only be assumed they would want a cheap, affordable way to get there.--Vladivostok 17:33, August 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well if you know my name, I support nuclear power in the vacuum of space =P --NuclearVacuum 17:46, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Well, now everything makes sense again. I also thought of something else. Since they are going to Venus, would the Moon act as a natural launching site for any missions? I seem to recall a plan regarding accelerating a space craft on the surface of the Moon and then launching it into space. Would that help in shortening the trip?--Vladivostok 18:05, August 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well I have been thinking about that too. I think both Luna and Neith would become launching pads and colonies of their own, but since Venus would be the primary focus for the space programs, the idea of using either moon would be slow at best. Maybe only recently did a working Moon base became online. --NuclearVacuum 21:57, August 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the sooner the better, because the Moon is a logical stepping stone on the path to both Venus and Mars. Perhaps there is a sooner Mars landing then as well?=D--Vladivostok 22:16, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Venusian Colonies
I can't imagine the European, Asian or South American nations stand by and watch America and Russia gobble up all of Venus. They'd probably get most of it but I can see there being smaller states sprinkled throughout this new world. Neith I see as being a potentially heavily British populated world. Historically we don't always go for the most comfortable or sensible geographically but Neith is idealy placed as a waystation.
 * Well, I the author did state that he had no intention of only having American and Soviet colonies on Venus, but that there would be smaller European and other colonies as well. Although there could be British colonies on Neith, I think, as you already said, that Neith acting as a waystation would be one of the first things that the U.S. and the USSR would try and colonize.--Vladivostok 09:44, August 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * "I the author"? What's that supposed to mean? Anyway, I was going to mention this, but I have been busy for the past few days. The USA and the USSR would be the dominant forces on Venus, but they are by far not the only ones. I am still working on a map of Venus, which would show the oceans, continents, and area claims on the planet. Currently, I am thinking that New Kamchatka (USSR) and Kennedia (USA) would be the only two nations on Venus, while Japan, China, a joint European, and a joint Arab colony would also be on Venus. And based on how fast they are moving, I guarantee that India and Iran would form a colony by 2025, but I can't predict the future (LOL). But it is much more complicated to explain in only a few sentences, but I predict that there would be several "non-national" states on Venus. By non-national, I mean ones that were formed by a group rather than a nation. Maybe something like a "Scientology State" or something. But I also plan that the nation of Earth would sign a "Venus Treaty," among the issues would be to not colonies all of Venus, leaving acres of land free from colonization. Like I said, I need to explain it more than one sentence or paragraph. --NuclearVacuum 17:46, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe it was supposed to be an L that went into well. Just a typo, relax, I'm from the TSPTF, I'm supposed to prevent trouble, not start it.:)--Vladivostok 18:20, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

No worries, just saying =P --NuclearVacuum 18:33, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking about how the ESA and other space agencies could reach mars as they have nothing like the space shuttle that they can use. I came up with two possible ways for the ESA to reach venus. The first would be to use a combined Arine V/Black Knight rocket, the Arine would take the Black Knight out of the Earths Atmosphere before the Black Knight would be launched and take a crew capsule to Venus from which the Astronauts could be launched down to Venus. The other way would be to build a base on Neith and then build a version of the Hermes space plane that could go down to VenusVegas adict 08:12, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

With such a strong incentive to travel into space, I'm sure the ESA would have developed an analogue to the space shuttle, and furthermore, so would have many corporations. By 2010 the practicality of technologies which today are merely theoretical would likely mean we have a number of large spaceplanes and would have invested into technologies such as inflatable modules - TransHab, and the CSS Skywalker. Indeed, the CSS Skywalker brings up an interesting point - it is a commercial space design using inflatable modules which, when fitted with an engine, could change its orbit allowing it to visit the moon. Could such a vehicle be developed for the Venus-Neith system, or even adapted into the large vessels needed to move people en masse between Earth and Venus? I'd like to create a page about this - the ships involved in interplanetary travel. Fegaxeyl 09:47, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

I did mention that the ESA could use thier version of the Space Shuttle in the second option. However unlike NASA the ESA doesn't have have as much cash, so a posible joint Orbital Shipyard between the ESA/Japanese Space Agency and posibly the Chinese Space agency as well would allow for the construction of space planes similar to the Hermes in orbit above Venus. P.S this is based on the plan by the Russians for thier mars mission.Vegas adict 10:52, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that the motivation is so strong that cash is less of an issue. Going to the moon had financial issues, but due to the nature of the mission it had a budget large enough to accommodate many fiscal problems. Colonising Venus is not only a major ideological project, it also has the potential to offer a return, which is why governments would allocate large sums of money to associated projects. When corporations are factored in their efficiency would drive down costs to make it much more affordable. The ESA's OTL financial worries would probably be dispelled because all participating nations would be willing to invest far greater amounts of money. Fegaxeyl 11:06, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

venus moon
It could just be that a hypothetical impactor hits venus at aa different angle. Simulations show that if the protoplanet Thaea hit at one different algle, we would have had two moons. If it hit at another different angle, we, like venus, would have no moon. Mean Mr Mustard 19:54, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

British colonisation of Venus (Venusian Haven)
Any objections? Bob 17:17, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hm, interesting idea. However, I was intending that the EU and ESA as a whole (including the United Kingdom) would have made colonies on Venus together. I believe that the colonization of Venus would bring the world more together. I take this because that is how the EU intends to get to the Moon today. I can understand, because the UK is much more independent and the most ant-EU of the member states. But I still need more convincing. How would the UK be able to colonize Venus on her own? What would that mean for the UK-EU relations? --NuclearVacuum 18:15, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

The actual turning point for this in terms of exploration is the 60's when the USSR really goes for it and heads to Venus. At that point the ESA hadn't been formed and most importantly, Britain wasn't a member of the EU. The UK had its own space programme and we successfully put a satellite into space under our own steam. The whole project collapsed because it didn't seem to be able to yield a reward in the long term. But here, we have a clear and very definable reward, which is the raw materials of Venus and a chance for greatness. Britain has been defined as a Great Power from the early 19th Century to now. Our economy is far in excess of India yet they have a space program purely because we have such a large government funded public sector. The Age of Austerity described has Britain geared up for space, scrimping and saving, hoping that it will cut it. That and the fact that the loss of empire made us feel aimless. This is the aim that could have rejuvenated Britain and maintained her as one of the premier powers of the world. And I don't really think the EU would actually settle areas for the EU and not her constituent parts. The ESA would eventually subsume the British Space Agency, but it would be a little more than a cheaper alternative to each nation having their own space agency. If anything, I see France getting into space and settling Venus before Britain. Bob 18:49, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry for not replying soon enough, but my mind has been in other places. Anyway, I think that is a pretty good idea. I also love how you dealt with the British in the GWS timeline, and I would love to see what you have in mind here. --NuclearVacuum 14:20, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

The Greens and Venus
Would the various groups proposing ecological and related causes have Venus orientated sections in this timeline? Jackiespeel 17:22, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * What do you mean? --NuclearVacuum 18:15, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Groups such as Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and other bodies - the Venusian-orientated equivalents wish to maintain the biodiversity etc of and prevent ecological damage to Venus. Jackiespeel 18:26, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh? Well, I need to write the page about this, but the world would sign a, which would ban the use, excavation, and transportation of fossil flues on Venus. It would also leave a good portion of the planet under a non-governing zone, meaning it would be left alone. But you are interested in writing the articles for these groups yourself, feel free to do so. --NuclearVacuum 18:35, September 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * I know just enough about the subject to flag the issue - and I presume you mean fossil fuels? Jackiespeel 18:38, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Venusian nation contest... thing (hooray)


Hello to all of you who love the planet Venus. I am going to be opening a contest... thing where you can create your own nation on Venus. The idea worked very good for the Great White South timeline, and now its Venus' turn.

Well anyway, let me make a quick background for you all. My map of Venus is the exact same as in OTL. If you were to look at topographical maps of the surface of Venus (like this one), you may be able to see a difference between highlands and lowlands, the "continents" of Venus. If Venus had water, it may look a lot like Earth on the geographical sense.

But unlike a map for an ice-free Antarctica, a map of a terraformed Venus is harder to come to a conclusion. But I have found a map which seems to show what I have in mind very well. The map above is just that. But for any of you Russophobes out there, I came across this map on a Russian site, so yes, its all in Russian. Makes sense, the Americans went to Mars, the Soviets went to Venus. But you don't have to read Russian in order to understand the map. On the bottom of the map is the scale for the surface. I made a line showing where the ocean surface shall be on Venus, so you should be able to see the continents of Venus quite well. I got the map from this site. It also has similar maps of Mars, the Moon, Mercury, and the Earth.

So anyway, back to the contest... thing. As you can see, I have already added several nation. They are:


 * 1)  (USSR)
 * 2)  (USA)
 * 3)  (USA)
 * 4)  (Japan)
 * 5)  (Iraq)
 * 6)  (PRC)
 * 7)  (France)

There are also several other Soviet colonies which are not connected with New Kamchatka, and land left aside for a possible "Scientology State." But all these nations are not canon as of yet (excluding New Kamchatka).

Anyway, here are the rules for this contest:


 * 1) All land near the poles (all areas north and south of the 60th parallels) are off limits.
 * 2) Mostly the coast is up for grabs, please avoid inland or landlocked nations.
 * 3) New Kamchatka is the largest nation on Venus, please try not to grab so much land to overshadow NK.
 * 4) Please make an article about your proposed nation/colony, giving some detail as to its origins. Please add the   to the page.
 * 5) Write a subsection here, linking to the article. Also add a map showing the area of your proposed nation/colony.
 * 6) Be considerate, leave area for other to participate, and there needs to be area left ungoverned on Venus.

All the proposed nations will be voted based on a consensus, but I do have final say. Otherwise, have fun. Thank you for your support. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 20:01, November 19, 2010 (UTC)