NASA discussing preliminary plans to build moon bases

[Brdavs]

Right, I'll be sure to send Bush the memo "In the future, when NASA plans a new project, don't tell anybody".

 

Anyway, this thread is about plans for a moon base, not plans to send a human to mars.

 

It`s arguably about ambitious space exploration in general. And that needs political backing, since we`re rellying on governments. Political backing that tends to be reluctant if it laks short term benefits of an ideological one over someone else... Maybe Obama gets elected and cuts NASA budget in favor of healthcare or McCain gets elected and cuts it in favor of an Iran war lol.

 

Pretty much. They're not part of the ISS team. Don't blame me for that.

 

my appologies for believing that ppl can make advances even if not asociated with the ISS? ISS that both US and Russia have on\off plans of ditching btw.

 

That's nice. Good luck to China. And good luck to you trying to relive the 'glory days' of the cold war, but somehow I doubt you'll get much success.

 

What "glory days of the cold war"? Christ, "competition" is a cornerstone of our capitalism and a big factor in our development as a species. So yea, I do believe rival spaceprograms are a good thing. Different approaches, motivation to outdo etc. etc. Doesnt necesarilly mean we have to go back to nearly blowing eachother up. What`s with the cold war fobia of subconsciously marginalising and devaluing any contribution a nonwestrn country might turn up providing lol?

 

 

....

 

While it annoys me that every post you make is political and aimed at seeing the worst in things, I'd just like to point out that Russia and the US have been working together in space for something like 20 years. If one of them wants to do a certain mission on their own, I hardly think it's time to proclaim a new cold war.

 

As a side note, NASA gets about half of their plutonium fuel for space from Russia, and as it stands has enough of their own to last about 2 more missions, running out in 2020. It's not the end of the space programme, but you can probably see why it's not the beginning of a new cold war, either.

 

I may see "the worst in things" but my view is based on the history of human kind and space exploration.

What is your "optimism based on if I may ask? just how has the world fundamentally changed in the past lets say 500 years? The discovery of the new world led to a race for it, and looking at the papers today (re fosile fuels and indeed antartica to an extent) I`d say that, barring some great unification hit, a race for the new world(s) is not so unplausable.

Call me a pessimist but things like "star wars programme" and arming of buran and missle defence systems springing up are hardly confidence inspiring. Note also that one of the biggest obstacles to thigs like the Earth space elevator are the political and military implications of which entetie would control said megastructure etc. etc.

Now I wish I lived in the hunky dory universe you do, but from what I see I don`t, and I call`em as I see them. I do like your fait in humanity and it`s adminisrations thoe, very cutely naive

[walkerguy]

What we really need is waste management for all the space debris. Some sort of energy tool to break down the components and allow them to burn easily in earth's atmosphere. Also colonizing anything in the Earth system would be unwise. And what I mean is homes, schools, good ol' colonies, not research stations, build those of course.

[Brittany]

Cool. Glad to see NASA is still keeping on.

[walkerguy]

Recent news about the Discovery shuttle

 

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - A metal clip broke off Discovery's rudder and only four hours passed before the seven space shuttle astronauts got the good news: The missing part poses no danger for Saturday's re-entry and landing.

 

Ever since the Columbia tragedy five years ago, any shuttle part seen floating away in orbit gets NASA's attention — fast.

 

Mission Control reassured commander Mark Kelly and his crew on Friday that their spaceship was safe for coming home, and that the missing clip would not jeopardize anything. Good weather is expected for Saturday's landing in Florida.

 

A protrusion in the same area at the tail, reported by the astronauts around the same time, also was found to be harmless. The rudder's position made the so-called bump look strange when, in fact, that piece of thermal barrier was exactly how it looked at liftoff, Mission Control said.

 

During a pair of broadcast interviews on Friday the 13th, Kelly acknowledged that he and his crew were worried at first. The clip broke loose during a routine check of the flight systems needed for Saturday's descent.

 

Kelly said he was impressed at how quickly engineers were able to resolve the issues, and noted that the zoom-in photos of the fleeing clip, taken by one of his crewman, helped in the analysis.

 

LeRoy Cain, chairman of the mission management team, said without those pictures, it would have taken engineers longer to identify the lost piece and possibly could have delayed landing.

 

Space shuttles have returned to Earth in the past with clips missing from the rudder, which opens like a book to serve as a speed brake. The V-shaped spring tabs, just 2 1/2 inches by 1 inch, protect that area from the intense heat of liftoff by providing a seamless barrier down the back edge of the rudder, or tail, panels.

 

Engineers suspect this clip, or tab, came loose during the vibrations of launch on May 31, and it wasn't until the speed brake panels were opened for checkout Friday, that it floated away.

 

Following Columbia's destruction during re-entry in 2003, the Air Force went back through its radar images from the flight and found a small object in orbit with the space shuttle. Accident investigators concluded it almost certainly was a fragment of a heat panel from Columbia's gashed wing.

 

Flight director Richard Jones said his team "reacted with a very calm, levelheaded approach."

 

"We knew that we had to methodically work every single piece of data that we could get. After we had that in hand, it became clearer and clearer that we did not have an issue," Jones said.

 

Astronaut Garrett Reisman, meanwhile, returning after three months aboard the international space station, said he is "cautiously optimistic" that his adjustment to gravity won't be as bad as some have experienced, and that he may not suffer as many balance problems because he's short.

 

"My sensory organs are a little closer to my center of gravity, and my heart has a little less distance to pump to my brain," he said. "I've been waiting my whole life, and I think finally this being short is going to come in handy for once."

 

Reisman said he is looking forward to sleeping in his own bed and using his own toilet. He said in an earlier interview that his last month at the space station was difficult because of a broken toilet and preparations for Discovery's arrival.

 

The toilet was fixed after Discovery delivered a new pump along with the prime payload, a billion-dollar Japanese lab.

 

Reisman woke up on his 94th day in space to a song requested by his wife, Simone Francis, and beamed up by Mission Control: "Baby Won't You Please Come Home" by Louis Prima and Keely Smith.

 

"A special good morning to Simone, my favorite earthling," Reisman called down. "Get ready doll face, Discovery is coming home."

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080613/ap_on_sc/space_shuttle

Edited June 14, 2008 by walkerguy

[Walsingham]

I agree with davs that competing space programs is crucial. Competition serves to focus the minds of the (sometimes) mediocre in charge. But competition also drives the use of alternative strategies and technotactical solutions. If you want to see this in action, try organising a soapbox car race, versus getting everyone involved in building just one car. The car will rarely get built at all, but the competing racers will really move!

[Darque]

Recent developments in ion drive technology are cool, too. The Dawn, for example, fires only one ion at a time, and the thrust that gives is equal to a piece of paper falling on your hand. But it fires ion after ion, never stopping. Normal rocket engines do one big burst and that's it. They're fast, but inefficient. The Dawn can, over time, reach speeds massively higher, with a fraction of the fuel and weight.

 

That's awsome.

 

No, it's a word better than awesome. A word not invented yet. So awesome will have to do.

 

[Xard]

Actually Nick did invent one already

 

awsome

[Walsingham]

Putting weapons on the moon isn't about how easy it is to hit stuff from up there. It's about how hard it is to hit stuff up there from down here. A base would provide immense strategic depth.

 

Of course one migt point out that many many potential enemies could be placated for the price of a single moon base. On the other hand, no-one builds statues of nice people.

[Humodour]

AFAIK, weapons fired from space (nukes) are extremely unreliable and practically infeasible.

 

And I don't use 'practically' as an intensifier, but as a descriptor - it's actually not feasible.

[Walsingham]

AFAIK, weapons fired from space (nukes) are extremely unreliable and practically infeasible.

 

And I don't use 'practically' as an intensifier, but as a descriptor - it's actually not feasible.

 

Nonsense. That's what they said about the speed of light, and look at me! You'd never guess I am actually typing this at faster than the speed of light.

[Gfted1]

Arent there already satellite based MIRV's? I dont see why dropping one from orbit would be any more problematic then launching one into orbit and then dropping on the target.

[Walsingham]

Arent there already satellite based MIRV's? I dont see why dropping one from orbit would be any more problematic then launching one into orbit and then dropping on the target.

 

What he said.