President's Commission on Moon, Mars and Beyond

http://www.moontomars.org/

Check it out and see.. So far it is skimpy, but it looks okay. Need
latest versions of IE or Netscape/Mozilla. Netscape 4 just does not
work..

Mike

Are the aliens on their way here, and we are just hiding it. Or do we
just need a new direction to our nation? Star Fleet or just another hole
to drop ALOT of money?

Alaska

I'm one of those all for getting onto the moon, the sooner the better,
though it's become interesting that official "spin" and "damage
control" folks like "Gordon D. Pusch" that continually claim to know
everything there is to know, are getting miffed about what's so easily
had upon our moon, as well as anything pertaining to Venus, and now
anything pertaining to Sirius is supposedly off-topic. The prospect of
the LSE-CM/ISS utilizing the affordable basalt composite tether(s) has
also become too much for these folks.

BTW; posting this into sci.nanotech wasn't my idea, though I certainly
can't see what it could possibly hurt, as I'm fairly certain the
physics of nanotechnology is going to get into this, one way or
another. Seems those basalt microspheres and of just the common basalt
fibers are certainly a couple of the more interesting opportunities.

I obviously can't do everything, nor can most common folks, though
others can certainly pitch in with whatever their expertise, as even
odd notions along with whatever mistakes is allowed, as long as those
mistakes are not of the sorts of intentional flak like I've been
receiving for the past three years.

The question often asked; "they (NASA/ESA) must be able to do
something" simply has gone answered, though as for their first-off
negative stance about nearly everything under the sun pretty much sums
up the sorts of "can do" or can't possibly do" issues as most of our
NASA/ESA folks see them; "where's the money?"

Too bad I'm not sufficiently rich nor polished at my saying "I told
you so" or perhaps "finders keepers", as I'd certainly have liked to
have involved others, along with at least matching funds, and to
insure the absolute fullest of credits on their behalf. As far as
"where's the money" goes, I believe this is a self enterprising
opportunity of folks simply doing whatever's right, as even if we
continue making our human mistakes, chances are that whomever survived
Venus is going to have something we need, and vice versa, and thereby
perhaps our resident warlord(s) can summarily take whatever from them,
or we might consider being nice and accommodating for a change, as
lord only knows, they might make their initial mistake of thinking
we're not so bad to deal with, as all we'll have to do is keep the
likes of Osama bin Laden from speaking with them, or perhaps even
those Dogon folks should be excluded, since they haven't developed the
necessary levels of greed and snookering to the degree that we've
managed through our in-your-face carnage-R-us policies.

What's needed are for these folks opposing just about everything under
the sun, to start telling us specifically why it's supposedly so damn
difficult or even impossible as to deliver a sufficient laser beam,
onto and thereby sufficiently penetrating those nighttime clouds of
Venus. Even placing a serious long distance laser packet on it's way
toward Sirius can't be impossible, especially with the 0.1 milliradian
and 100 MW class delivery of those two death-ray outfitted ABLs.

Then perhaps thay can also be informing us village idiots as to why
the likes of TRACE can't seem to image upon the nighttime portion of
Venus.

Another question that needs answers;
What's so damn hard, or even spendy about establishing a Venus L2
stationkeeping platform?

Venus style aerodynamics is almost too good to be true, so why not
simply place an interactive communications kiosk onto their tarmac?

Here's the latest deliveries upon "what's new and of what's hot", as
offering a little more of my three brain cells worth on behalf of
Sirius terraforming the likes of Mars, Earth and Venus.
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-earth-venus.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm

Calling Venus;
If you're perchance interested in the hot prospect of achieving
interplanetary communications, as for that quest I've added lots, if
not a little too much, into this following page;
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-interplanetary.htm

BTW; There's still way more than a darn good chance of there being
other life of some sort existing on Venus:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm

Some good but difficult warlord readings: SADDAM HUSSEIN and The SAND
PIRATES
http://mittymax.com/Archive/0085-Sad...andPirates.htm

David Sereda (loads of honest ideas and notions upon UV energy), for
best impact on this one, you'll really need to barrow his video:
http://www.ufonasa.com

The latest round of insults to this Mars/Moon/Venus class action
injury:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-what-if.htm

Some other recent file updates:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-gwb-moon.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-illumination.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-moon-02.htm

Regards. Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA


Abrigon Gusiq wrote in message ...
http://www.moontomars.org/

Check it out and see.. So far it is skimpy, but it looks okay. Need
latest versions of IE or Netscape/Mozilla. Netscape 4 just does not
work..

Mike

Are the aliens on their way here, and we are just hiding it. Or do we
just need a new direction to our nation? Star Fleet or just another hole
to drop ALOT of money?

Alaska

This lunar goal is worth supporting, even if it's via our resident
warlord. Though as for starters, we may need some actual lunar science
data that's of "real time".

"Deploying dozens of small javelin lunar probes on the cheap"

As just an example;
I'm thinking that of a modern day probe with a suitable battery and
compact PV cell array that's either tightly integral and/or
subsequently deploy able upon impact, that perhaps this form of micro
instrument and of it's data/transponder could be comprised of as
little as 1 kg. Of course, of your vastly superior "all-knowing" probe
can become whatever, 10 kg 1 t.

As for my initial delivery scheme, I'm thinking of involving hydrogen
or whatever gas filled balloons, actually quite a good number of
balloons within one another, and obviously not the least bit for their
buoyancy, but as for spreading out the impact to a rather sizable zone
of perhaps as much as 10 m2, as opposed to the instrument probe impact
zone representing as little as a mere 0.001 m2 (25 mm upper body with
a tapered 25 mm 5 mm spike end), and of what this relatively small
instrument/probe may be looking somewhat like a miniture spear or half
javelin.

1/2*M*V2 = impact energy or equivlent mass, whereas the V = 1.6 m/s/s

In other words, I'm suggesting that the initial impact of this small
probe can be spread conservatively by at least 1000:1, therefore if
the raw velocity at impact were to become 5 km/s, thus a 1 kg/probe
that was surrounded by another kg worth of balloons and sub/micro
balloons that would impact at an overall worth of 25,000 tonnes,
though this energy is subsequently being spread over the 10 m2, thus
the actual javelin probe body of 0.001 m2 should become merely 2.5
tonnes, though applying another 10X fudge factor makes for 25 t.

Any way you'd care to slice it, 25 tonnes worth of probe impact is
still one hell of an impact, though I tend to believe this could be
survivable, especially since the notion of delivering any decent probe
will ideally need to be firmly implanted into lunar soil and rock, the
deeper the better, as long as the upper protion remains exposed for
receiving and transmitting data.

Obviously, if this turned out being the 25 tonnes worth of impact
survival, as representing too much to ask for, then enlarging the
balloon and of increasing the numbers of the smaller balloons within
should further spread this impact, thus decelerating and taking the
brunt of the probe delivery impact. Another avenue is to lengthen upon
the spike end, at the risk of increasing the mass, as the compression
of this semi-hallow javelin will also absorb energy. Obviously the
deployment and desired free-fall vertical positioning will need to be
gyroscopic, though the probe itself could be initially set spinning at
100,000 rpm, adding somewhat a friction drilling attribute to the
probe impact.

The lunar soil (supposedly 11% reflective index and of clumping moon
dirt) should account for another degree of impact deceleration, then
of the penetrated rock and I'll assume some degree of compression of
the javelin probe tip itself should absorb whatever remains. At least
if all fails, the value per micro-probe isn't going to bust the world
bank, nor stress the technology expertise to any breaking point, as if
need be a dozen of every required instrument function can be deployed,
so that if only one survives the delivery, we've accomplished the
task.

Unlike those Apollo landers, every facet of these probe deployments
can be fully tested and confirmed on Earth prior to accomplishing the
real thing.

Of course, having a fully fly-by-wire robotic lander certainly would
be nice, though a wee bit spendy, and I'll suppose that of some day
our crack NASA teams will actually obtain that degree of purely rocket
powered controlled flight capability, as otherwise the next best
technology is obviously what the recent Mars probes utilized in order
to decelerate their impact. Since there's so little difference between
the thin Mars atmosphere and that of the moon, where actually the
lesser gravity of the moon should almost offset this disadvantage, so
that such a well proven method of essentially dropping objects safely
onto such a foreign surface seems almost like way-overkill for the
task of delivering such small (1 kg) probes onto and preferably as
partially impaled into the moon, though dozens of such probes might be
safely deployed by one such velocity breaking maneuver, such as
bringing everything to a vertical velocity of zero at the elevation of
1 km would certainly do wonders for alleviating the horrific impact
that's otherwise faced with the 1.6 m/s/s influence of lunar gravity.

A raw javelin probe of 1 kg, as dropped from 1 km, should impact at
roughly 0.8 t (800 kg), well within survival specifications of even
toys-R-us, which might not even represent sufficient impact for
implanting these lightweight probes.

Keeping in mind that shape and/or size is not a velocity factor, other
than spreading the impact energy over a greater or lesser zone,
whereas the Hindenburg of 242 metric tons and of representing more
than 210,000 m3 will obtain the exact same impact velocity as a
bowling ball or that of a dust-bunny, identical velocity as long as
each were introduced from the same altitude.

Of course, this is all purely "one-way", and never given a second
thought of our retrieving anything but measured data, nor of having to
sustain human or other life by shielding them from the truly horrific
elements of various lunar exposures.

I believe such small/compact probes can be engineered to survive these
sorts of deployment impacts, as well as sufficiently immune to such
horrific radiation, and of their avoiding meteorite impact, as their
odds are greatly improved upon by the sheer fact that these compact
probes represent such a small target, though eventually they'll each
be pulverised by something.

Regards. Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA

Guth/IEIS~GASA wrote:
This lunar goal is worth supporting, even if it's via our resident
warlord. Though as for starters, we may need some actual lunar science
data that's of "real time".

"Deploying dozens of small javelin lunar probes on the cheap"

[...]

I believe such small/compact probes can be engineered to survive these
sorts of deployment impacts, as well as sufficiently immune to such
horrific radiation, and of their avoiding meteorite impact, as their
odds are greatly improved upon by the sheer fact that these compact
probes represent such a small target, though eventually they'll each
be pulverised by something.


[Moon science delivery]
Interesting idea Guth...

But for what science beyond what we already have?

Is this of greater importance than ISS or exploring the rest of the
solar system?

Should we not be exploring the 70% unexplored of our own planet first?


Regards,
Martin

sci.astro.seti

--
---------- Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today.
- Martin - Teach him how to fish and he won't bother you for weeks!
- 53N 1W - - Anon
----------

I believe such small/compact probes can be engineered to survive these
sorts of deployment impacts, as well as sufficiently immune to such
horrific radiation, and of their avoiding meteorite impact, as the

Its really a great idea. Mass produce enough such probes after full testing and
trial deployment to find out what fails in real life.

Mass production lowers costs. imagine having hundreds crawling all over mars?
After first testing the concept on the moon.

Go back and take a look at the old apollo landing sites from a distance too and
debunk the claime we never landed

Martin wrote:

Should we not be exploring the 70% unexplored of our own planet first?

No. To learn about the solar system's origin and development, we need
to get off Earth. Too many destructive processes going on here - like
tectonics and erosion! ;-)

"Hallerb" wrote in message
...
Its really a great idea. Mass produce enough such probes after full
testing and
trial deployment to find out what fails in real life.

And, of course, to keep track of what part of management to blame, eh?

And, of course, to keep track of what part of management to blame, eh?

With unmanned probes it really doesnt matter. You dont want to waste money but
even failures can be used for learning.

now add human dying and everything changes

"Hallerb" wrote in message
...

And, of course, to keep track of what part of management to blame, eh?

With unmanned probes it really doesnt matter.

You think not? Explain to Congress that your probe crashed because of a
problem with Metric conversion.

You think not? Explain to Congress that your probe crashed because of a
problem with Metric conversion.



thats why I said you dont want to waste money. FBC really screwed up lots of
things,