NASA Says It Will Set Up Polar Moon Camp

I am glad to see Nasa focusing on our nearest body again. I never got swept into Mars hype. I haven't understood why our projects haven't centered squarely on building a good space platform from which to work from. I agree we should probe, map, and further understand our neighbors, but when the work comes to it we can only springboard off that which is around us and the ISS is not exactly a cheery springboard atm.

As well I hope we see further private endeavors keep pace. We need a healthy community to be growing.

It's all about the resources, wherever you go. What's the fuel system for this vehicle and where is the fuel coming from? Just as important as the lander is a lunar orbiter as part of the system. I see way more engineering there: fuel depot, Earth orbit rendezvous, lifeboat, autonomous systems, etc. The I.S.S. is in the wrong orbit.

Not sure about putting men on the moon or sending them to Mars. We need to think more carefully about what we can do out there. Technology is getting so good that we can send probes that can tell us more about the planets than if we go ourselves.

Take another look at Cassini! What an amazing voyage to Saturn that is and look at the latest martian orbiter photographing a rover already there. It's almost like everyone can be there who wants to be.

We need to do more of this. Send probes to all the planets before we think about going ourselves. We need a very compelling reason to go out there and I don't see one unless a probe gives us one.

Probing the planets will cost a fraction of the price tag to send a man.

But thank you NASA for all that you do. Thanks to you I am already on Mars and circling Saturn.

Awesome! Lets do more!

I'm interested to see how they're going to overcome the problem of space debris. The lack of atmosphere is going to generate problems that construction on Earth has never had to deal with.

The safety procedures should be interesting too...if they were doubting a mission to repair the Hubble because of the difficulty of sending rescue/reaching the ISS if trouble occured, how do they expect to prepare for problems with a lunar station?

It is incorrect to state that 'NASA has refused to estimate a price tag for the project.' Nasa's timetable is based on exisiting budgets which are publicly available. In short - it's going to take this long assuming no increase in present funding.

I've written about the uselessness of NASA on my own blog but I feel compelled to comment again due to this article. Here's an excerpt from my original post:

In this age of computers can someone tell me why we don't already have intergalactic space travel yet? Why are we, essentially, using the exact same technology that we were using ~1969? Something doesn't sit well in that thought. We have satellites that can take a picture of the color of your eyes from orbit.

Don't tell me the technology isn't there. The stealth plane was in operation in the late 70's – we heard about them when? I can't remember the debut of this machine but it seems it was in the early 90's – at worst the extreme late 80's. At a time we were building hoopty cars like the '79 Ford LTD – oh yeah – we had aircraft that was invisible to radar.

So now, I see this article on Newsvine where they're planning to setup a "Polar Moon Camp" that will be "permanently staffed" by 2024.

Don't you think this is entirely inappropriate, given we have people that are literally starving. Homeless people are freezing to death during harsh winters. All of the economic problems we have in this country yet, somehow, we find the (what I'm sure is) billions of dollars to waste away on programs like NASA – a program that hasn't given us anything notable since Tang and the memory foam mattress. Maybe it's just me but, I just don't get it!?!?!

Don't get me wrong… I'm all for new technology, astronomy, space exploration, etc… but if we can't make significant advancements, then why are we wasting such large amounts of money – and I mean tangible advancements. I don't care anything about a new type of bed mattress!!!

Sounds interesting, but the money could be spent on much more important issues here at home. Obviously we are talking about Trillions of Dollars.. Although if Rumsfeld can formally announce 2.3 trillion mysteriously missing from the Pentagon on the day before September 11 attacks they are capable of anything, if you know what I mean.

It's certainly true that Cassini, the recent Mars rovers, and other missions have demonstrated the great value of unmanned missions. As far as science is concerned, an argument could certainly be made that the returns from such unmanned missions, relative to their difficulty, makes them preferable to manned exploration. But I also think an argument could be made that a human presence on site is capable of more than any robot we are likely to build in the next hundred years. Modeling the curiosity and intuition of a good scientist is likely to prove more daunting a task than the engineering to reach a distant world. For all their spectacular success (I'm a big fan) Spirit and Opportunity actually accomplished very little compared to what a human geologist in the field might expect to do in a day, even burdened by a space suit.
That said, even if we had robots as capable as humans, I'd still think we should go ourselves. And truthfully, I'm not certain why.

>> NASA Looks to the Future With Eye on the Past

By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 4, 2006; Page A08
Implementing the VSE: Show Me The Money
NASA Looks to the Future With Eye on the Past, Washington Post

"But Wes Huntress, a former NASA associate administrator and ex-member of the NASA science advisory board, said that ever since Bush announced the space exploration vision, the administration has refused to give the agency additional funding to accomplish its mission. The result is that "Griffin has had to cannibalize the agency to get the money for the new program," Huntress said. "Even at that, I don't think there are sufficient funds to support even the return to the moon once the program gets really moving." >>

NOW WHAT DOES THIS TELL US?!

What a joke...2024..right?..Watch "Behold a pale horse" on google video..We've had a moon base since 1958..That's why the astronauts were so mad at NASA after they landed on the moon. They found out the truth..Think I'm crazy?...Prove it..watch the video...open your eyes...The joke has been on us...

Excuse me, but what happened Bush's promise to land a man on Mars after he succeeded in rapeing the public treasury for the benefit of his friends in the short term back in 2002.

I do not believe that NASA will succeed in this unless they also include a "recovery from from Bush and GOP" factor in their estimates.

Thanks to the fool who has no comprehension of science or economics this country may well be a world 2.5 superpower with in the next 10 years.

I will believe this when China and especially that former great superpower, the USSR (Russia) say that they are going to do the same thing based on their own notions of national security.

Oops, excuse me, I seem to have a bit of escaped Polonium 210 running around the house. Anybody have any idea how I can recapture it.

Sincerly

Ernest Olsen

The amount of panda's we could save and breed with this money.

I'm sure I speak for both Ansab and I when I say this is an atrocious waste of money : (

(really.)

Whether this will turn out to be a waste of money or not, it is an inevitable next step in human space exploration. Is it likely to be useful or a collossal waste of time and effort(not to mention money)? only time will tell. I see it as another way of the Bush admin trying to set the agenda of future administrations and trying to latch onto something that could be considered a positive legacy, instead of its disaster in Iraq. The techno problems will be legion - solid and liquid fuels for any current technology vehicles that stage from there or from earth or moon orbit, oxygen, and all human supplies for the outpost have to be lifted there from earth, which means the amount of the same is going to be very limited without a huge number of cargo flights. While I'm no scientist, I doubt that any vehicle that vetures out to Mars or beyond can be powered in the same manner as our spacecraft of today - a debate similar to the one NASA engaged in when it developed the technology in use today - see Freeman Dyson's early works - will have to occur again, and this time, my money is on Freeman's approach. The cost of the program is of no concern to Bushco. Another tax cut and the economy will pay for it, right? And sure there will be spinoff technology - and for RealityPolitics re: great advances, I say Velcro and Teflon (and there are probably quite a few coatings and ceramic based and heat retardant materials out there, but I'm still waiting for fuel cell technology to be implemented in our pedestrian lives. (In other words, more things than we know but less than we should suspect). This will happen eventually, but my money says it won't be as a result of this effort.