Moon Base!

POSTED BY: Calhoun
UPDATED: Thursday, February 19, 2004 05:44
VIEWED: 10570
PAGE 2 of 4

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

NOOCYTE

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 3:27 AM

First off...I just re-read my earlier post. GADS, I'm long-winded! Sorry 'bout that, gang!

Now, as for the engineering project: I quite agree that a milestone mission to the moon could be useful for the Mars Project (I like the sound of that!), and could set the stage for some really useful problem-solving (and science!) on Luna. But it should be just that: A milestone.

The trouble I have is with NASA's track record of developing tech for one thing, with a murky goal down the road (say, the Shuttle for the ISS), then having it become bloated and increasingly distant from that goal as contractors try to justify more and more funding. This happened to the Shuttle, which was supposed to be a cheap, re-useable...well...shuttle to service a future space station.

Similarly (I fear), the buzz from the administration is about establishing a "permanent moon base," which threatens to be replete with tech which simply is not scaleable to a Mars mission, due to the fundamentally different mission architectures and environments.

Now, imagine some kind of modular architecture with, say, a standard Crew Hab, transit and return vehicles, life support, etc. Such a design could be tooled up at an interim phase to achieve a lunar installation, an L1 outpost, etc., without significantly digressing from the core goal. In this case, it would be a milestone, in that it would contribute materially to the engineering (not to mention the P.R.) problems of a Mars mission.

And yes, please don't let them call it Alpha! Even if the Eagles did win (har-har).

Okay, now who's up for some Moon pi?

Keep Flyin'!

Department of Redundancy Department

BROWNCOAT1

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:31 PM

I agree that the moon is a shortsighted goal, but it is a step in the right direction. The monumental feat to get a craft spaceworthy of the long manned trip to Mars may be a bit more than NASA is cut out for right now.

I have not really understood the need for all the orbital flights of the shuttles myself. Other than producing some great photos, and occasionally launching or repairing a satellite, there seems to be no real goal with these short flights.

I wonder how much of the zeal behind the administrations push for a permanent moon base has to do with the fact that the Chinese are claiming they will have a moon base by 2012. Is our pride in danger of being damaged if another country beats us to it? Are we that foolish that we have to say we are the first and best at everything that we are blowing money on goals that are not raising the bar?

What are the pros & cons of establishing a permanent moon base? Could it be a stepping stone for space exploration, or are we spinning our wheels and blowing tax payers dollars?

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

DRAKON

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 9:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
I agree that the moon is a shortsighted goal, but it is a step in the right direction. The monumental feat to get a craft spaceworthy of the long manned trip to Mars may be a bit more than NASA is cut out for right now.

However, the way to get NASA up to snuff enough to do it, is to do it. Perhaps you are right, NASA ain't cut out for it now. The challenge of doing it would force the agency to get their act together, to get to the point where they can.

Does this make any sense?

Quote:
I have not really understood the need for all the orbital flights of the shuttles myself. Other than producing some great photos, and occasionally launching or repairing a satellite, there seems to be no real goal with these short flights.

Sigh, true, sadly. Its all practice, and part of running a space launch system needed for Mars or beyond. There does not seem to be any grand vision, like Apollo. And the shuttle seems woefully inadequet for the task that it was designed for in the first place.

But you also got a problem of political will. Space flight is expensive today. Any grand vision is going to be expensive. I don't know that the American taxpayers will see the benefits of space flight being greater than the costs.

Quote:
I wonder how much of the zeal behind the administrations push for a permanent moon base has to do with the fact that the Chinese are claiming they will have a moon base by 2012. Is our pride in danger of being damaged if another country beats us to it? Are we that foolish that we have to say we are the first and best at everything that we are blowing money on goals that are not raising the bar?

I would not dismiss "pride" so quickly. One of the reasons why governments go in for space flight is to prove themselves to the rest of the world. A moon colony would be a mark of a highly advanced technical civilization. Part of that civilization is the political structure and philosophy behind the culture. The US and China have radically different ideas on such issues as human rights, liberty, etc.

Which is right, or more right than the other? Traditionally, such conflicts were decided militarily. This is not a good idea in this day and age. So a space race becomes a better alternative. It may be just as expensive as a war, but it kills far fewer people.

Quote:
What are the pros & cons of establishing a permanent moon base? Could it be a stepping stone for space exploration, or are we spinning our wheels and blowing tax payers dollars?

Yes. Unfortunately, both. A lunar base could be a stepping stone, and a construction facility for larger vessels to tackle Mars and beyond. Or it could be a giant boondoggle. As boondoggles go, I can think of worst ways to waste taxpayer dollars. But then, I really want off this rock.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

FREEFORMER

Friday, January 16, 2004 12:43 AM

Quote:

I would not dismiss "pride" so quickly. One of the reasons why governments go in for space flight is to prove themselves to the rest of the world. A moon colony would be a mark of a highly advanced technical civilization. Part of that civilization is the political structure and philosophy behind the culture. The US and China have radically different ideas on such issues as human rights, liberty, etc.

I agree, pride (national or personal pride) is an excellent reason to go to the moon or Mars.

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
Traditionally, such conflicts were decided militarily. This is not a good idea in this day and age. So a space race becomes a better alternative. It may be just as expensive as a war, but it kills far fewer people.

I love this idea, it sounds beautiful. However, the space race will always benefit the military arsenal, just from the new technologies developed. I am cynical enough to believe that keeping a good military may always be a necessary thing, because there will likely always be people who think their mission is to force their opinions on others.

Quote:

But you also got a problem of political will. Space flight is expensive today. Any grand vision is going to be expensive. I don't know that the American taxpayers will see the benefits of space flight being greater than the costs.

Perhaps the taxpayers will see the worth when they realize it is also an issue of national security. The moon is high ground. Attacking from the moon can be as simple as launching rocks large enough to survive reentry. (Targeting is somewhat of a problem, but the intimidation factor would be immense. Not to mention the difficulty in retaliating against a moon base.)
A base on the moon is a good military decision, especially when another military power is also looking to go there.

HUMBLE

Friday, January 16, 2004 12:54 AM

I wonder if Bush realizes moon is not made of cheese. But seriously, the U.S. doesn't have health care for it's citizens and GW wants to put colony on moon? Does this seem right to you? Two-thirds of unmanned missions to Mars fail now. How will sending a manned mission there be a better idea. From what I'm seeing on tv, even the eggheads don't think mission to Mars a good idea. This is all just pre-election fodder and hype for Bush reelection platform!

NOOCYTE

Friday, January 16, 2004 6:52 AM

Not much time/energy to reply at length, but I did want to speak to this point:

Quote:

Two-thirds of unmanned missions to Mars fail now. How will sending a manned mission there be a better idea.

Had Apollo 11 been an unmanned lander, all other things being equal, it is very likely that it would have failed. Eagle's original trajectory to the surface of Mare Tranquilitatis would have brought it right smack into a field of uncharted, lander-cracking boulders. It was Neil Armstrong's human judgment which allowed him to look out the window, size up that situation, take the stick, and translate over to a more favorable patch of ground (with only a few seconds of fuel left...thus embodying the term, "steely-eyed missile-man").

The lack of such real-time judgment is what has doomed several other missions (e.g., a simple pre-insertion checklist would have caught the whole 'foot-meters' debacle which crisped the poor Climate Orbiter!). Having thinking, reacting, decision-making, problem-solving, improvising, glitch-fixing, pigu-saving humans on board actually significantly increases the chances of success (not to mention exponentially increasing the amount and quality of science that can be done once there).

Submitted for your approval.

Keep flyin' (and switch to manual control, please)!

Department of Redundancy Department

DRAKON

Friday, January 16, 2004 12:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HUMBLE:
I wonder if Bush realizes moon is not made of cheese. But seriously, the U.S. doesn't have health care for it's citizens and GW wants to put colony on moon? Does this seem right to you? Two-thirds of unmanned missions to Mars fail now. How will sending a manned mission there be a better idea. From what I'm seeing on tv, even the eggheads don't think mission to Mars a good idea. This is all just pre-election fodder and hype for Bush reelection platform!

Yes.
Contrary to popular belief, we do have health care out here in the colonies. It just ain't free. But then nothing is. And because it is run more by free market forces instead of bureaucrats, it is more flexible to what the folks need, vice what some Washington politician tells us we need.

Whether it is pre-election fodder or not, well, I don't know, nor really care. Serenity ain't lifting off for real until we at least get back to the Moon, then on to Mars and beyond. If you want to stay on this rock, fine. I don't.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

TEELABROWN

Friday, January 16, 2004 1:38 PM

Just remeberd something while reading this. My dad tells me that when we tried to get a man on the moon, that was just a step towards the other 4-letter M word: MARS. So, hopefully, we will get ther soon.

Keep flyin'! We should make it there someday!

............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!

CREESO

Friday, January 16, 2004 2:21 PM

Been readin' this site for awhile, helpin' out when I can (hsx being the newest venture), but this is my first post (just created an actual logon today). So forgive me if somethin's a little astray.

The way I see, don't much care where we go, as long as we're flying.

Seems people are always wondering about wasting tax payers money when it comes to space exploration. Even after we went to the moon, people said it was all a big waste. Seems to me someone once said that necessity is the mother of all invention. Well it looks necessarily necessary to come up with some new stuff if we're going to try to go anywhere and stay. And that new stuff, well, it just might be some sweet stuff for all those tax payers to have and to hold. Might even be some sweet stuff for old mother nature by the time it's all said and done. Most people don't seem to realize that the moon mission brought a great deal down to us lowly tax payers. From improving computers, to handheld battery operated tools, to velcro (just to name a few off the top of me head).

As far as the political side, well I ain't going to go there. Let's just say I'm pretty anti-Bush, and this is all just tearing me up inside.

Side Note and quite off topic: I love this site, I love what all you browncoats have done to keep the faith, and of course I LOVE firefly.

JASONZZZ

Friday, January 16, 2004 4:02 PM

Oh boy, the shuttle missions might have lost their aim and the true original purpose as the "workhorse of the space exploration fleet", but by no means have they been a complete drain on cash either. Just a quick short list of very important things have been done:

Launching and repairing the Hubble. There are no other launch platforms that are capable of lifting the hubble into that kind of orbit. There are no other platform that could have allowed the repairing of satellites. Without which we wouldn't have the type of astronomical breakthru we've been having.

studies on effects of microgravity of aging.

studies on microgravity of manufacturing materials , medicine...

Continuous high attitude high resolution photography. Flight recorded images of the shuttles are continually being used by a wide range of industries and scientists: looking at deforestation trends, ocean current patterns, atmostpheric/environment trends, urban growth, etc, etc.

Creeso, love this site? Check out my sig...

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
I agree that the moon is a shortsighted goal, but it is a step in the right direction. The monumental feat to get a craft spaceworthy of the long manned trip to Mars may be a bit more than NASA is cut out for right now.

I have not really understood the need for all the orbital flights of the shuttles myself. Other than producing some great photos, and occasionally launching or repairing a satellite, there seems to be no real goal with these short flights.

I wonder how much of the zeal behind the administrations push for a permanent moon base has to do with the fact that the Chinese are claiming they will have a moon base by 2012. Is our pride in danger of being damaged if another country beats us to it? Are we that foolish that we have to say we are the first and best at everything that we are blowing money on goals that are not raising the bar?

What are the pros & cons of establishing a permanent moon base? Could it be a stepping stone for space exploration, or are we spinning our wheels and blowing tax payers dollars?

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE