Nasa should have built a moon base instead of the ISS in the first place. At least a space race will help keep the bean-counters away from the development budget and put some strategic focus into the effort.
NASA may be going to the same old moon with a ship that looks a lot like a 1960s Apollo capsule, but the space agency said Monday that it’s going to do something dramatically different this time: Stay there.
Unveiling the agency’s bold plan for a return to the moon, NASA said it will establish an international base camp on one of the moon’s poles, permanently staffing it by 2024, four years after astronauts land there.
The only problem is, the Russians have a good chance to beat us there.
Nikolai Sevastyanov, president of the Energia Rocket and Space Corporation, said Russia will build the first permanent lunar base in 2015. NASA managers claim that U.S. astronauts will land on the Moon in 2018 and manned lunar bases will subsequently be established. Chinese scientists are also spotlighting their intention to exploit the Moon’s natural resources.
If the US and Russia don’t manage to do it, there are a couple of new competitors in the race.
China’s unfolding space plans include that country’s first foray into exploration of the Moon. A Chang’e I lunar orbiter is nearing final construction, being readied for rocketing to the Moon in 2007.
Preparations to launch Chang’e I—named after the Chinese goddess who flew to the Moon in a popular fairy tale—are to be completed by February for launch later next year, according to a November 29 report by China’s Xinhua news agency.
Even India is getting into the game, with some help.
Why does India, a poor country, want to explore the moon instead of using that money to alleviate poverty?That was the question raised six years ago when India’s space agency ISRO (Indian Space Research Organisation) asked the government for $65 million to build and launch an unmanned scientific spacecraft to circle the moon.
I agree with Stephen Hawking in that our only hope to survive as a species is to establish ourselves offworld, and a lunar base is the first real step.
First, its about damn time. Second, I’ll believe it when I see it.
This will finally establish us as a space race. With the failure of the space shuttle soon to be behind us, maybe we can finally get things moving outside of earth orbit.
As far as India not using its money to alleviate poverty, as we all know you can throw gobs and gobs of money at the problem, but the poor have to want to improve, not just get free handouts and they shoot up in the alley. Money for moon exploration is a much better use of funds then for some social welfare program that would probably be not used for its intended purpose anyway.
We should have had a base there long ago… before I was born some 25 years ago. I am excited a bit as during my lifetime all we have done is circle the planet, when we should have been on the moon and exploring further
nobody is ever gonna survive crossing the van allen radiation belts. no one’s ever gonna make it out of this spherical prison. kiss those trekkie dreams goodbye.
4,
Then how did the 12 guys who walked on the Moon already survive the trip?
the ISS is important, IF THEY use it…
They can make a SPACE only craft Larger then a Earth based craft.
Picking up Nitrogen Ions Should be easy from the ISS, If they can do it…
It will become a transit center.
Earth based ships can carry Loads up, drop off and go back to earth.
A moon shuttle, and go back and forth to the moon and make DROPS to those below.
The First shuttles will need to land and be torn apart for parts, and building. but If its built in space, as space ONLY..That thing can be made VERY large.. With or Without a pilot…Just get the First parts ON the moon.
But, we need a manufactouring plant on the ISS..
Huh?!
I thought GDub said we were going to Mars, as a stepping-stone to the Moon…
#5 Alix
THEY FAKED IT.
How do you expect them to survive the Van Allen belt in a tiny ship just wrapped in aluminum foil like a sandwich?
8. Angel, I think you have lived in the tropics waaay toooo looong.
#8 Your thinking of the LEM, it was wrapped in foil. The Command and Service module were a little more durable.
There’s a big difference in taking a 8 day jaunt to the moon, and surviving that radiation for months. Unless they tunnel, I don’t see how that can get enough shielding, especially if a nasty solar flare head their way. Too bad the basic research wasn’t funded since the Apollo days. They’re starting from scratch with thin skin cans and a puff of hydrazine.
11,
First, the van allen belts are around the Earth, and any moon travelers would only be exposed to them for a short time.
Second, one would only need to build the moon base underground to shield it from radiation, and shovel technology is pretty mature.
The Russians can barely pay for their current space program without whoring themselves out to space tourists. How are they going to beat us to having the first base on the moon?
Living on the Moon could be an adventure in dodge ball. Since the Moon is constantly being bombarded by space debris and meteors. I hope those glass domes are rubberized so all the crab that falls on them bounces off.
The Moon dosen’t have all those pock marks because it ate to many Milky Ways as a teenager.
Having said that….I think it would be kick ass cool!!!!
#13. One thing for sure – there is no lack of ground on the Moon.
Which, of course, differentiates it rather dramatically from NEO. Develop a way to make lunar concrete (a SF staple) and construction costs on the Moon should be negligable, at least for materials. Labor will be rather pricey, however.
Again, negligable materials costs would be rather dramatically different from NEO, where every gram has to be hauled out of the gravity well.
If this actually happens, I will dramatically alter my opinion of Dumbya’s tenure as president – not a TOTAL failure.
I think the real race is with the Chinese. If we build a base on the lunar ice fields, that keeps the Chinese and Russians out (something to do with decades old treaties, I think). I doubt this is about true exploration and more about keeping a military advantage.
Keeping the Panama Canal out of Chinese hands would have been much cheaper and beneficial, BTW.
I thought Bush and co didn’t believe the wild claims of these Galileoists and instead advocated intelligent falling.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512
And probably super-smart geocentricism too.
I recently bought a copy of THE GREEN HILLS OF EARTH by Robert Heinlein in the Chicago airport. I hadn’t read it in more than thirty years. Sitting on my plane to London, my eyes filled with tears to remember the great dream of the 20th century. Exploration and colonization of the Solar planets and the moon.
For those of us who sat on the floor in front of a television and watched every space shot, every launch, every recovery, every step on the lunar surface. For those of us who peppered our bedroom walls with photos of Atlas and Titan and Leika the dog and the map of mars, for those of us who dreamed that science and technology would allow us to escape the planet of the apes, for us—this is like starting all over. My first thought on reading this was “will I be alive to see it?”.
We can’t have Barsoom, or the slave plantations of Venus. We can’t have middle earth or interstellar travel. There is so much we will never have. But for God’s sake, GIVE US BACK THE DAMN MOON!
Wasn’t it Heinlein who said
” The Earth is to small a basket for the human race to keep all its eggs in”
About time it went somewhere.
One small step for a man, one long wait for mankind.
This is a waste of money. They’d be better off shutting down NASA for a decade, and restart it then.
This is a waste of money. They’d be better off shutting down NASA for a decade, and restart it then.
That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
Let’s go directly to Mars instead. Going to Mars isn’t much more difficult than going back to the Moon. Just read the stuff at http://marssociety.org
I think a moon camp is a great endeavor.
Scientists can experiment & learn how to build a bubble here on earth – hopefully before Republicans destroy earth’s environment and bankrupt our nation for good.
The moon is also a good spot for the Bush 1/2 $Billion library.
G. Bush will not have too much influence on the space drive to the moon since he only has two years left in office. Since most of the years listed in the excerpts are beyond 2010, I would say the next two presidents will have more influence in the space race. Make sure you pick your presidents wisely. The USA space program will always suffer budget problems because congress would rather keep the money in their states. A commercial back mission to the moon has a better chance to succeed.
For those who want to feed the poor, donate to a charity. Creating a welfare state (more taxes to pay) does no one any good. Most charity donations are tax deductible (less taxes to pay).
Time out: Why aren’t we working with the Russians on this?
James Hill
I believe there is a Heinlein (“The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”?) novel where the Lunar colonists rebel against the earth and start hurling mass down on the earth using the linear accelerators develped to send raw materials from the lunar mines. A large amount of mass can make it through the atmosphere and ruin your day. So until we sign the lunar non proliferation treaty whomever gets there first wins. Change the plot a little and you have a James Bond film (Moonraker?).
Except Moonraker sucked.
23,
Placing a Manufactouring plant on the moon, Means we can build in space.
We can make ships that are BIG, VERY BIG, And Thick siding for Micro meteor Impacts, that WONT spring a leak. We can use engines that you WOULDNT want to use on the earth, we can make BIG engines with REAL thrust, insted of trying to Coast there…
you may not remember, but we Really didnt fly to the moon…We coasted. We floated there, and with a small boost Floated back.
With a decent saized engine we can power our way THERE and back..Which would take Alot less time, then a Full year of travel. ANd we could use a REAL generator, insted of battery power.
They HAVE a hydrogen ion engine. but it really cant be used On the earth, we cant test it. but according to the IDEA. If launched it could reach the edge of our system in about 1 year, at which time it Could be going Just under the speed of light.
Do you know the problem with the speed of light? try sending a signal Back. This is like throwing a ball out the Back of a truck…It dont go very far, in relation to the ground.
Hell, you could use a NERVA engine (or even an Orion) on the moon, just make sure the launch pad is a healthy distance from the base. With constant acceleration Mars is only weeks away, and the asteroid belt becomes our cornacopia. We could even do the refining on the moon and send lifting-body ingots of raw materials back to earth.
Not only did Moonraker suck, but it was made in a Communist vs. Capitalists world.
Capitalists nations do not go to war against each other: There’s too much money to lose. By working together we could exploit the moon and mine it to our collective hearts’ content.