-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
NASA: We are going to the Moon. To stay, so we can go beyond. To MARS, and further
- Thread starter Greigor the FellHand
- Start date
It is for the best really.
Much easier to go to mars from the moon instead of going straight to mars like Elon Musk said he wanted to do.
Much easier to go to mars from the moon instead of going straight to mars like Elon Musk said he wanted to do.
If 'fiscal conservatives' can hand out trillions in tax cuts then we can stop handwringing about if we can afford good things
Either I'll die in peace off this terrible rock, or I'll live long enough to be proven right that humans could even fuck up space. Win-win
Luna could be a distraction, sure, but it would also allow them to do a lot of field testing of systems and technology before implementing them on Mars.
It's probably not necessary and adding unneeded expenses but would be much safer in the long run.
Yeah sure whatever.
too many of these announcements over the past 20 years for me to care or believe.
We can AFFORD good things, the fucks in charge won't fund them. It's one of the few things I'm still mad about that Obama signed off on. We shovel money into the Great American war machine but hate science and exploration.
No. If you can construct a ship on the lunar surface you can make it much larger than one you have to design to escape Earth's huge gravity well. You need much less fuel to get it into a transfer orbit to Mars.
How? You will need to build a moonbase and a launch pad first. That's gonna be costly as fuck.
Yeah which is why I don't even know how he expect it to go as well as he thinks it will.
Edit: I might be misunderstanding your post. Do you mean the base on the moon would be expansive? If so it would be much less costly than to go to mars straight from the earth.
OP
OP
actually I understand the moonbase a bit more, the more i think about it, and why it could be important
its more about making a colony on the moon that would slowly become a testing site for future off world hubs, and also an experiment on it. its close to earth, so if theres an emergency they can get supplies relatively fast, as compared to something on a martian colony breaking and taking 6 months to arrive.
added benefit is also having a strong population on the moon, that if somethign did wipe out life on earth, we still have the colony on the moon to survive and expand from.
Erm, haven't we already got lots of experience constructing large habitats in LEO? You can't tell me it's cheaper to develop, implement and resource the manufacture of ships on the lunar surface compared to that...
This doesn't make sense. You will need to shoot the spacecraft materials into space from Earth surface first before you assemble them on lunar surface. What makes more sense, transporting rocket parts to lunar surface on multiple trips so we can launch the spacecraft from there, or assemble the spacecraft on Earth itself and launch the spacecraft from our launch pad?
Not to mention the countless human checks and manual stuff engineers would have to do before a launch. Where will all these engineers come from? Having Mission Control on Earth would work but other than that this thing is not better than what we do currently.
OP
OP
not if the idea, is to build a low G forge. tether asteroids and bring them to refineries on the moon, and construct it from there.
Yeah. The climate is much better in those places. A lot less worry about rising sea levels due to only having trace amounts of water.
Remember when Bush announced this plan in 2004 with a planned moon landing around 2020? Good times.
They say this every few years, it doesn't mean anything.
By the time they manage to get their own rocket off the ground, Musk, Bezos, or some other billionaire will have been chilling there for years, sipping mojitos on their Martian plantations.
By the time they manage to get their own rocket off the ground, Musk, Bezos, or some other billionaire will have been chilling there for years, sipping mojitos on their Martian plantations.
Well for one there are no natural resources in LEO, they have to be brought up from the surface while the Moon presumably has some minerals and stuff
So it's cheaper and faster to build and install material refineries, processing and manufacturing facilities on the moon than sending up a few more rockets?
This whole plan for a moon base to make Mars easier sounds like a better concept for a sci fi show than a genuine practical plan.
I strongly suspect SpaceX will be back to the moon first.
The idea is that you construct and fuel your ship with materials from the moon. You don't just use it as an assembly staging area.
The idea is that you construct and fuel your ship with materials from the moon. You don't just use it as an assembly staging area.
You're thinking of this as a fiscal problem when the person you're talking to is referring to solving a physics problem.
Sure, if the moon is actually your starting point... But everything we send to Mars is going to start on Earth, and Earth->Moon->Mars is FAR FAR FAR more difficult than straight Earth->Mars, both in terms of delta-v (propellant) requirements and mission complexity.
Only makes sense if you have a lot of mining and manufacturing infrastructure already set up on the Moon, which is a very distant goal. If you want to construct a ship off Earth right now, doing it in Earth orbit makes infinitely more sense than doing it on or around the Moon.
Here is a map of the Solar System, in terms of delta-v (change in velocity, or essentially the propellant requirements) to go between different surfaces and orbits. Add up the numbers between any two points, and that's how much it costs to go between them:
http://i.imgur.com/SqdzxzF.png
If you're trying to get to Mars from the Earth, going to the Moon on the way gains you absolutely nothing. It's more costly to get a ship or materials to the surface of the Moon than to get to Mars orbit.
Last edited:
I'll believe it when I see it, their SLS program which is the driving force of their vague moon/mars plans has been a complete disaster internally, becoming so over budget and so overly delayed that it honestly might be cancelled the same way that Constellation was - their old moon/mars plan just a decade ago.
This video comes out just days after their former administratior described their Lunar architecture as "stupid", and weeks after a report blasted them and their contractors for mismanaging the rocket part of the program so badly. Not a particularly good look. If the program continues to be managed like this then NASA isn't going anywhere.
This video comes out just days after their former administratior described their Lunar architecture as "stupid", and weeks after a report blasted them and their contractors for mismanaging the rocket part of the program so badly. Not a particularly good look. If the program continues to be managed like this then NASA isn't going anywhere.
Last edited:
I heard the declassified tapes from the Oval where Kennedy talks about it before his speech, and states something like "I don't give a damn about going to the Moon". So, yeah.
After watching Issac Arthur's wonderful video on Lunar colonisation my imagination is racing at the possibilities. Ah, how I'd love for this to be more than simple PR. I agree with what others have said, even if this were a genuine announcement, SpaceX or some other company will beat them to it (although I'm happy for it to be anyone, just as long as somebody does it).
Also, I expect there maybe some angry Tweets over "this is not about flags"!
Maybe if we all club together Era can donate enough to name a moon colony?
Also, I expect there maybe some angry Tweets over "this is not about flags"!
Maybe if we all club together Era can donate enough to name a moon colony?