NASA Back to Moon by 2018 - But WHY ?

(CNN) -- NASA Administrator Michael Griffin rolled out NASA's plan for
the future Monday, including new details about the spaceship intended
to replace the shuttle and a timeline for returning astronauts to the
moon in 2018.

The design for the new crew exploration vehicle (CEV) looks a lot like
the Apollo-era spaceship that first took NASA to the moon a generation
ago. It is a similarity that is not lost on Griffin.

"Think of it as Apollo on steroids," he told reporters at NASA
headquarters in Washington.

Under the new NASA plan, a "moon shot" would actually require two
launches, both using rockets derived from shuttle launch hardware.

One unmanned, heavy-lift rocket would transport a lunar lander plus
supplies and other equipment to low-Earth orbit.

Afterward, a second rocket would carry a crew capsule capable of
transporting up to six astronauts into a similar orbit. The two would
dock with each other, and then head to the moon.

The first few missions are planned to put four astronauts on the
surface of the moon for a week, while the unoccupied mothership orbits
overhead.

.. . . . .

OK - the question is "WHY ?". A few people for a few days at
a time ... it's just not worth doing (except to enrich certain
aerospace companies).

While doing the 'final frontier' thing is appealing, there just
HAS to be a little cost/benifit thinking done first. Describing
this particular endeavour as "Apollo on steroids" is quite apt -
because it doesn't seem to accomplish much beyond what Apollo
accomplished, just a little more of it for a lot more money.

IMHO, we should not return people to the moon until they're
in a position to STAY there, with plenty of company. This
means a whole different sort of program - with the first
phases being entirely robotic. First of all, a supply of
water MUST be found and exploited. Secondly, habitats and
equipment for a growing colony MUST be in place. Only then
should people start arriving.

Robots can explore, robots can drill and mine, robots can
construct habitats from imported and natural materials,
robots can assemble equipment - and do it cheaply, safely
and well. Any moon colony should be set up from the get-go
to be perpetually self-sustaining ... because financing it
from earth would be a perpetual and heavy drain on cash and
resources.

The moon is especially suited for using robots. Not only is
the gravity light and the solar-power potential high but it's
less than two light-seconds from earth. This means that
telepresence robots - with human operators or guiders on
earth - can be usefully employed. This will take up the
slack until the electronic intelligence folks come up with
some decent autonomous designs.

Robo-Ants - swarm IQ - may be very useful for exploring,
exploiting and building certain kinds of habitats. Smarter
bots will be necessary to run/maintain certain kinds of
equipment. Field-usable designs seem to still be ten or
twenty years away. We've got the computing power now, but
aren't sure what to do with it. 'Smart' is more than
gigaFLOPS, it's doing the right things in the right order,
'mind' -vs- 'mess'.

Lessons and techniques learned from moon-bots can then be
applied to the NEXT big step - mars.

In any event, it never hurts to put our eggs in more than
one planetary basket, but the next step is to MAKE the
damned basket rather than just shuttle veritible tourists
to the moon and back and watch them do pretty much exactly
what their predecessors did before. The 'next step' isn't
one of volume, doing more of the same old crap, but a whole
different paradigm - colonization. THAT will be worth the
money and effort.

B1ackwater wrote:

OK - the question is "WHY ?". A few people for a few days at
a time ... it's just not worth doing (except to enrich certain
aerospace companies).

The answer is chrome plating it, of course, that way when we finish
paving the earth the shine off of it at night will allow us to eliminate
street light posts, which cause accidents.

*********************************
http://crazypolitics.blogspot.com

"I knew Bush legitimately won in 2000 When a
Chicago Daly showed up to count votes"

On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 18:23:39 -0400, The_Bob
wrote:

B1ackwater wrote:

OK - the question is "WHY ?". A few people for a few days at
a time ... it's just not worth doing (except to enrich certain
aerospace companies).

The answer is chrome plating it, of course, that way when we finish
paving the earth the shine off of it at night will allow us to eliminate
street light posts, which cause accidents.

Ah ... but they're invaluable as a physical support
mechanism for drunks !

AlienGreenspawn ) wrote:
: On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 18:23:39 -0400, The_Bob
: wrote:

: B1ackwater wrote:
:
: OK - the question is "WHY ?". A few people for a few days at
: a time ... it's just not worth doing (except to enrich certain
: aerospace companies).
:
: The answer is chrome plating it, of course, that way when we finish
: paving the earth the shine off of it at night will allow us to eliminate
: street light posts, which cause accidents.

: Ah ... but they're invaluable as a physical support
: mechanism for drunks !

Are you kidding? Here in the US drunks allow themselves to be propped up
by their cars while they fumble around for their keys.

MADD and all their wisdom don't have enough clout to take on the
oil/auto industries with their political backers in a manner to change the
public transportation systems of the US one iota.

I'm sorry to say that the US public transportation system is Second World,
but that is by design.

Eric

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 19:26:39 +0000 (UTC),
(Eric Chomko) wrote:

AlienGreenspawn ) wrote:
: On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 18:23:39 -0400, The_Bob
: wrote:

: B1ackwater wrote:
:
: OK - the question is "WHY ?". A few people for a few days at
: a time ... it's just not worth doing (except to enrich certain
: aerospace companies).
:
: The answer is chrome plating it, of course, that way when we finish
: paving the earth the shine off of it at night will allow us to eliminate
: street light posts, which cause accidents.

: Ah ... but they're invaluable as a physical support
: mechanism for drunks !

Are you kidding? Here in the US drunks allow themselves to be propped up
by their cars while they fumble around for their keys.

They weren't so much of a problem before the traffic
density got so high.

MADD and all their wisdom don't have enough clout to take on the
oil/auto industries with their political backers in a manner to change the
public transportation systems of the US one iota.

I'm sorry to say that the US public transportation system is Second World,
but that is by design.

The urban geography of most US cities an suburbs is oriented
around using SPACE. This means that it's generally a long way
from wherever you are to wherever you need to go. Most old
european cities, built-up pre-automobile, are much more compact.
Not here. Since we are not going to tear down all our cities
are start over, we're kind-of STUCK with the status-quo.

This makes the private automobile a necessity. Public transport
generally won't get you close enough to where you need to go -
at least not without changing busses five or ten times. You
need to go twenty miles to work, five miles to the market, three
miles to other stores, five miles to school, to take kid #1 to
baseball practice ten miles south, kid #2 to soccer practice
five miles west and the dog to the vet six miles north. Then
you have to collect everyone again in a few hours. Sleep, and
repeat the next day. Public transport ? Forget it !

B1ackwater ) wrote:
: On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 19:26:39 +0000 (UTC),
: (Eric Chomko) wrote:

: AlienGreenspawn ) wrote:
: : On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 18:23:39 -0400, The_Bob
: : wrote:
:
: : B1ackwater wrote:
: :
: : OK - the question is "WHY ?". A few people for a few days at
: : a time ... it's just not worth doing (except to enrich certain
: : aerospace companies).
: :
: : The answer is chrome plating it, of course, that way when we finish
: : paving the earth the shine off of it at night will allow us to eliminate
: : street light posts, which cause accidents.
:
: : Ah ... but they're invaluable as a physical support
: : mechanism for drunks !
:
: Are you kidding? Here in the US drunks allow themselves to be propped up
: by their cars while they fumble around for their keys.

: They weren't so much of a problem before the traffic
: density got so high.

Right, and pollution wasn't so bad when we had less people. The problem is
that we have a Second World public transportation system in the US.

: MADD and all their wisdom don't have enough clout to take on the
: oil/auto industries with their political backers in a manner to change the
: public transportation systems of the US one iota.
:
: I'm sorry to say that the US public transportation system is Second World,
: but that is by design.

: The urban geography of most US cities an suburbs is oriented
: around using SPACE. This means that it's generally a long way
: from wherever you are to wherever you need to go. Most old
: european cities, built-up pre-automobile, are much more compact.

Agreed, but isn't ironic that both Japan and Germany have bettr systems
than we do. The space issue is a cop out and an unwillingness for us to
challenge the status quo.

: Not here. Since we are not going to tear down all our cities
: are start over, we're kind-of STUCK with the status-quo.

Because we are too lazy to challenge the politicians and the
industrialists in fear of being label socialists. It is THAT sturcture
that does not make us free even though slick propaganda and whole legion
of lackeys swears that we are. You and I and all others are slaves to Big
Oil. Look how they have us thinking that gas under $3 a gallon is good.

: This makes the private automobile a necessity.

It doesn't HAVE to be that way! We allowed this to happen! I know you
lived overseas. You have seem how much superior Frankfurt, Berlin and
Munich's public transportation is as compared to the US. Your complacency
and unwillingness to tell it like it is only feeds the problem.

: Public transport
: generally won't get you close enough to where you need to go -
: at least not without changing busses five or ten times. You
: need to go twenty miles to work, five miles to the market, three
: miles to other stores, five miles to school, to take kid #1 to
: baseball practice ten miles south, kid #2 to soccer practice
: five miles west and the dog to the vet six miles north. Then
: you have to collect everyone again in a few hours. Sleep, and
: repeat the next day. Public transport ? Forget it !


Right, so what exactly does suspending one's license accomplish?

NASA Back to Moon by 2018 - But WHY ? (aka B1ackwater),
This is yet another new and improved contribution as related directly
with accomplishing our moon for the first time by 2018, and of getting
ouselves to/from that nasty sucker as well as shipping probs off to God
knows where brom a lunar base of operations or best away from the
LSE-CM/ISS. However, being topic/author banished is having it's silver
lining, in that we village idiots don't have to deal with all of the
usual mainstream flak simply because we're sufficiently right and they
(the all-knowing lords and wizards of NASA's ruse/sting of the century)
simply can't stand the thought.

Of going places far and wide via Uncle Al's "stardirve"; perhaps
appreciating "How Hot The Moon" may become somewhat related as to why
it should also have more than it's fair share of RADIUM(Ra-226) to
spare.

It seems that our being topic/author bashed and/or banished by all the
pro-NASA/Apollo and thus anti-ET and therefore anti-God freaks has it's
silver lining, in that I don't have to deal so much with all of their
mainstream spermology flak simply because I'm sufficiently right and
they simply can't stand the thought.

This time it's become the notion of Radium--Radon as utilized for ion
plasma thrusters that has raised the Guth bar of what's
taboo/nondisclosure another notch or two.

Take to mentioning the likes of our icy proto-moon along with whatever
terminology of RADIUM or even RADON is almost as mainstream flak worthy
of slamming doors as per discussing the topic of those horrific SODIUM
atmospheric storms that became a good portion of the 900,000 km comet
like trail having been CCD and narow spectrum optical filter enhanced
images of such being solar wind extracted away from the moon. Of
course, discussing anything that's photon or even physically related to
whatever's of secondary/recoil or vaporising of anything upon our moon
is entirely taboo/nondisclosure, just like the need-to-know natural
colors and otherwise deep albedo of our moon isn't to be taken into
topic consideration.

Silly me, and here I'd thought this next topic/story was actually going
to become another highly interesting notion of yet another perfectly
worthy concept that's anything but all that original. Though obviously
"Uncle Al's" superior stardrive beats my radium/radondrive via radon
plasma-ion thrusters all to hell, and then some.
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.ph...rm/thread/a47=
40ef840094820/1191e16695fda8e8?hl=3Den#1191e16695fda8e8
"Voyage to the stars" by Leonard David,
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.ph...rm/thread/2aa=
1dc4f5d3ab04b/b873b6cb7472d3ea?lnk=3Dst&q=3Dion+thruster&rnum=3D 8&hl=3Den#b=
873b6cb7472d3ea
Since we don't seem to have the latest do-everything stardrive from the
likes of wizard "Uncle Al" at our disposal but, we do seem to have ion
thrusters that need a viable resource of plasma gas, as such this is
certainly not by my way of village idiot thinking such an entirely bad
notion "To send a spacecraft where none has gone before is a dream
assignment for any space scientist and engineer", or at least to send
off a probe with a sufficient cash of our best digital smut as stowed
onboard in order to make those damn ETs take a closer look-see at what
in the Sam Hell went so terribly wrong back upon Earth, that's
otherwise been orbited and subsequently terraformed with salty ice and
the DNA/RNA within by such an icy proto-moon.

However, in order to accomplish this extended/everlasting task of
getting whatever craft or probe to the next available star system, I
believe of what's to be needed most of all is a great deal of speed and
thus a great deal of continuously applied thrust, along with obviously
the necessary element of fuel and capable plasma generating energy
that's required, at least until that probe is passing the nullification
point of no return, such as the mutual gravity-well that's situated
between our solar system and that of the Sirius star system at roughly
3=2E5 fold our solar system mass might prove most gravity attractive.

That's why I'd suggested, perhaps there's yet another perfectly good
reason as to first "go back to the moon", or at least get there for the
first time, as for obtaining a large amount of Radium(Ra-226) so that
subsequently a large ion worthy amount of Radon(Rn-222) gas becomes the
medium by which the plasma thrust delivers the maximum kinetic energy
and velocity/kj.

Ionized radon plasma could and perhaps should become our the next best
form of powerful ion thrusters.
Although the radon thrust itself should be WMD invisible, it's greater
density as a gas, liquid or possibly frozen substance seems rather
interesting since radon is something that's not exactly all that hard
to come by, yet as far as I can tell, it seems that Earth and we humans
upon it could do quite nicely without the likes of radon.

One method of artificially creating an on-demand supply of radon while
on the fly is with having a sufficient cash of radium which supposedly
isn't exactly all that available upon Earth but, perhaps upon our moon
could represent megatonnes of Radium(Ra-226). Thereby the Radon(Rn-222)
ions as plasma thrusters of what a moon base of mostly robotic
operations could represent might become our very best alternative,
especially since by then solar/PV cell energy conversion/m2 at better
than 75% should become more than adequate for the available starshine
to be ionizing the likes of Radon into a substantial plasma flow. As
for getting whatever back up into lunar orbit shouldn't be all that
testy, and of course so much easier yet with the LSE-CM/ISS
accomplishing the simple and energy efficient elevator to/from task of
getting whatever tonnage of products and/or folks from the lunar
surface into the ME-L1/EM-L2 gravity free trade zone.

Of course a Plutonium energy cell for deriving the necessary kj/t of
probe might be supplemented along with having a 10,000 m2 PV collector
or possibly a tether dipole method of extracting energy from space, or
these days a sophisticated deep-space probe as performing as a one-way
massage packet transponder could become as little as 100 kg, whereas
the only message need be: SOS Earth(3rd rock from the sun) SOS
Earth(3rd rock from the sun) SOS, and so forth. If ETs can't manage to
extrapolate our position from following a portion of our radon ion
trail, then they're probably not worth their salt and shouldn't bother
coming to our rescue.

I'm thinking 222/131 =3D 1.71 fold thrust improvement (if not the square
of that amount being 2.89) over using Xenon and, a greater than 800
fold improvement in thrust duration due to utilizing a sufficient cash
of Ra-226 on behalf of producing the Rn-222 on the fly, thus a good
1360:1 overall mission improvement (that's not even taking the added
thrust velocity into account), which seems perfectly nifty for a
interstellar probe that could be making 10% light speed once getting
itself gravity pulled towards the next available star system. Meaning
that we could use the likes of Sirius as a terrific velocity booster
for sending that speedy probe far beyond.

Radium (Ra-226) offers a half life of 1600 years (I believe that's got
to represent lots of radon gas generation potential)
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/ra.html
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/xe.html
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/rn.html

Our Colorful Moon :
http://www.rc-astro.com/img/moon_colors_2005-04-18.jpg
All images and site content are Copyright =A92002-2005 by Russell
Croman.
=A9 2005 Russell Croman, www.rc-astro.com
http://www.rc-astro.com/contact.htm
The colors in the Moon image are real, in a sense, Croman explained.
"To bring out the differences between the various regions, the color
saturation has been greatly enhanced," he explained. "The hues are
correct."
"Differences in color on the lunar surface indicate different ages and
types of materials. Croman offers prints of this and other space
images."
Giving this image of his a 50% boost in contrast is certainly worth
doing, as that'll get the albedo a bit closer to reality. There are
actually many official color images of the moon as having been obtained
from orbit that are considerably darker and yet indicating as to a good
amount of deeply rich colors while fully solar illuminated. Thus
there's no viable excuse for the nearly white-out zones of colorless
lunar terrain that went on and on for as far as their UNFILTERED Kodak
moments could record.
~

Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
War is war, thus "in war there are no rules" - In fact, war has been
the very reason of having to deal with the likes of others that haven't
been playing by whatever rules, such as GW Bush.

-
Dear lord and all-knowing Bookman,
But what about all of the lunar radium-226 and of the subsequent
radon-222?

Why are you avoiding the truth and nothing but the truth this time?

In case your intellectual pagan buttology hasn't noticed, I don't give
a crapolla tinkers damn about your incest sexual partner (Bruce) in
crimes against humanity, but unlike yourself I actually do care about
radium.

Can you possibly be any more out of context for us lord Bookman(pagan
spermologest).
~

Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
War is war, thus "in war there are no rules" - In fact, war has been
the very reason of having to deal with the likes of others that haven't
been playing by whatever rules, such as GW Bush.

Almost agree. It doesn't need colonisation; exploitation would do.

And there might be a case for sending manned crew to visit a short list
of chosen base locations, before the base is deployed.

A descent cargo lander could have landed a mobile base, which could
have been crewed on an adhoc basis. As it is, each mission will do just
a little more than Apollo did 50 years before it.

"Alex Terrell" wrote in message
oups.com...
Almost agree. It doesn't need colonisation; exploitation would do.

What could we exploit on the moon that would worth the shipping cost (OK, I
know it takes a lot less energy to break lunar orbit than to break terran
orbit, but still!)


And there might be a case for sending manned crew to visit a short list
of chosen base locations, before the base is deployed.

A descent cargo lander could have landed a mobile base, which could
have been crewed on an adhoc basis. As it is, each mission will do just
a little more than Apollo did 50 years before it.

*sigh*
I remember staying up late to see men walk on the moon. I slept through it,
but I'll never forget how everyone in the USA (in my little world of
elementary school) saw everything differently the next day.

In article t,
abracadabra wrote:

*sigh*
I remember staying up late to see men walk on the moon. I slept through it,
but I'll never forget how everyone in the USA (in my little world of
elementary school) saw everything differently the next day.

It would be great to see the "robots" again. One of my first memories,
around age 3-4, was watching these human shaped robots bounce around on
our black and white tv. It wasn't until years later when I worked out
the year that I realized I was remembering the last moon landing...

--
Chris Mack "Refugee, total ****. That's how I've always seen us.
'Invid Fan' Not a help, you'll admit, to agreement between us."
-'Deal/No Deal', CHESS