Jump to content

NASA going back to the moon


TetsuoShima
 Share

Recommended Posts

NASA announced Tuesday that its new crew exploration vehicle will be named Orion.

 

Orion is the vehicle NASA’s Constellation Program is developing to carry a new generation of explorers back to the moon and later to Mars. Orion will succeed the space shuttle as NASA's primary vehicle for human space exploration.

 

 

Orion's first flight with astronauts onboard is planned for no later than 2014 to the International Space Station. Its first flight to the moon is planned for no later than 2020.

 

Full announcement.

 

I would never have imagined them going there again for real, I would have guessed they'd go straight for Mars, but the Moon is also nice. Especially, since the missions to the Moon will actually also be test missions for a later mission to Mars. :)

 

So, finally they're coming around for another round of 'real' space exploration, after 30 years of slowing down (or building up, depending on how you look at it).

 

 

Aaaahh, the excitement... :cyclops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I echo that cynicism. I think that many in the US government are aware that those damn Commies are going to become a rival - and sooner rather than later - a better when it comes to economic power. Maybe they're trying to lure the Chinese into a pointless space race.

 

As if the space race ever did anything for science or technological advancement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, from what I hear, the space race is indeed on again. Read the following:

 

CHINA will explore Mars together with Russia in 2009, Ye Peijian, the chief expert of China's deep space exploration, said in a conference yesterday, China News Service reported.

.

.

.

Chinese taikongnauts will be able to walk out of the space shuttles and live in space stations in the near future, said Sun Laiyan, director of the China National Space Administration.

 

A satellite-based global positioning system will cover China and nearby areas by 2010. An upgraded system including geosynchronous satellites, non-geostationary satellites, ground stations and user terminals, will be accomplished in 2020, Sun added.

 

China will also build up an integrated high resolution earth observing system to watch earth from the satellites, planes and stratosphere aero-boats in 10 to 15 years.

 

 

The deputy head of China's space programme says the country will put a man on the moon by 2024.

 

Long Lehao, deputy chief architect of the lunar probing project, told Hong Kong newspaper Wen Wei Po that the country "possesses the technology, materials and the economic strength" to put a man on the moon.

 

 

Japan's space agency has set a goal of constructing a manned lunar base in 2030.

 

The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has revealed its ambition to an international conference in Tokyo this week but has not yet been allotted the budget for the ambitious project.

 

JAXA hopes to launch a satellite into lunar orbit next year, followed by an unmanned spacecraft that will land on the moon and a probe ship that will collect samples from the moon.

 

Under the plan, the astronauts will be sent to the moon by around 2020 so that they will start construction of the base to be completed by 2030.

 

 

Slow link to article 1

 

Link to article 2

 

Link to article 3

 

 

Given that the US announced their plans latest, I would assume that it was NASA who got lured into another space race.

 

/me LOL's at some egos. :D

 

 

Anyway, I don't mind these develoments at all, it's sort of high tech, high budget olympic games... And I'm pretty sure, they'll learn at least something new while attempting it and it is better than all those military spendings they do (should money be a concern). :)

 

However, I highly doubt they'll reduce the military funding to fund a space project, more likely they'll cut into wellfare or invent a new tax or something silly like that. :rolleyes:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

At the rate things seem to be going in the private sector the governments of the world will have some more compitition by 2020 in the space race to go to the moon.

 

I don't think the private sector will be getting there that quick but they should be in a mid to high orbit around earth by that time and plans on the drawing board to go to the moon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, once you can get to mid/high orbit - you've done the hard part. Getting to the moon is relatively easy after that.

 

Of course, with the private sector it's really a question of whether it's profitable. Thus far, there ain't much on the moon to entice them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nothing on the moon to entice business?

 

easy access to minerals, lower gravity, undeveloped real estate, longer life spans for the technical workers?

 

once you get there with the workers and equipment, you can supply orbital structures for a lot less cash than sending stuff from a gravity well like Earth. Eventually, someone or some government is going to get filthy rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easier access to minerals? Perhaps you're forgetting the commute.

 

If you were right, people would be scrambling to get to the moon. Over 30 years since anyone went for a stroll on the Moon would indicate it's not exactly prime real estate.

 

Sure, in the future it might become more attractive but for the moment I think it's probably easier to get minerals and real estate on Earth and hell, if they get cheap orbital flight cracked, you could just knock stuff out in Earth orbit anyway - although, there are obvious advantages to the Moon. Mainly the ample supply of cheese.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's only 'easier access to minerals' if you've got ACCESS to minerals (there aren't really any on the moon) and don't need to ship things back and forth with Earth a lot. Also, given that we won't be sending people to Mars or the asteroid belt until we have a lighter weight solution to the cosmic ray problem (i.e. lighter than craploads of lead and water... both of which are VERY heavy), and the moon doesn't seem very attractive even as a staging area.

 

Also, lunar real estate ain't exactly very good (you can't really DO anything with it), and there's a lot of signs that low G environments cause serious health problems in humans, making it even LESS attractive for long-term habitation. Frankly, they'll be building houses underwater LONG before lunar landscape becomes affordable.

 

Going to the moon is nice, but they really should be investing in a good way to block cosmic rays so that future Martian pioneers aren't reduced to gibbering idiots in mere years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Van Allen Belt? Isn't that the one the conspiracy theorists say would kill anyone going into space?

 

As far as I can tell the only reasons for going to the moon are for that H3 (for which there is currently no use) or maybe if you wanted something a little more sturdy than an orbital platform.

 

But yes, Gorun is right about the problems. Although, I'm not sure if low gravity is a problem unless you actually come back to high G and I suppose, your bones would be more prone to breaking and such.

 

I'd have thought the obvious way to avoid cosmic rays though would be to construct shelters underground... but I guess that takes time and doesn't solve the transit issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

also has NASA forgotten about the band of radiation around our planet that would require 6ft of lead to make safe...lets face it we never went to the moon' date=' and neither will china[/quote']

 

The Van Allen Belt? Isn't that the one the conspiracy theorists say would kill anyone going into space?

 

I don't remember if the following YouTube links have been posted by someone else on the board, but they seem relevant to the current discussion...

 

Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land On The Moon? (Fox)

 

Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckr2w5XFJLw

 

Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fltlD9YIdyI

 

Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfZwgMO-ZWA

 

Part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijjK1YiVsi4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land On The Moon? (Fox)

Occam's razor is all Conspiracy Theorist's favourite 'scientific' method. (must be the easy to use part ;))

 

I've seen that 'documentary' and I thought it was entertaining.

 

Have you seen the one that includes ALL evidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen that 'documentary' and I thought it was entertaining.

 

Have you seen the one that includes ALL evidence?

 

No, I haven't. Is there really more evidence? The Fox documentary seems to be very detailed...

 

I find the 911 conspiracy a lot more convincing....

 

Most conspiracy theories are pretty much convincing. That's the problem. But I must admit I'm on the fence on those two (the moon landing and 911). Based on the evidence, both theories are possible. I hope the official accounts are true, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen that 'documentary' and I thought it was entertaining.

 

Have you seen the one that includes ALL evidence?

No, I haven't. Is there really more evidence? The Fox documentary seems to be very detailed...

 

There's similar 'documentary' in which they include some of the evidence which the Conspiracy Theorist's considers invalid. In that show they pick the CT a part and disproves almost everything. Now there's still a few oddities that can't be explained, but that doesn't make a theory any more valid, just because there's no simple explanation or lack of knowledge.

 

There's tons of Conspiracy Theories about The moonlandings/Apollo project. Wiki

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...