Falcon 9 heading for Moon in 2013?

Carrying Astrobotic Technology Inc.'s rover:
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=32670

Pat

In sci.space.history Pat Flannery wrote:
Carrying Astrobotic Technology Inc.'s rover:
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=32670

"with the robot narrating its adventure while sending 3D video" I
wonder if it will sound like the falling Whale in Hitchiker's Guide to
the Galaxy...

"will land softly, precisely and safely using technologies pioneered
by Carnegie Mellon University for guiding autonomous cars" you mean it
will be able to parallel park itself in a crater? Back in my day,
there was a hyphen in the name Carnegie-Mellon University dang it -
although I suspect an even older timer will grouse "It's Carnegie Tech
dagnabit, and get off my lawn!"

Grousing aside - Go Tartan!

rick jones '88
--
I don't interest myself in "why." I think more often in terms of
"when," sometimes "where;" always "how much." - Joubert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

On Feb 7, 2:03*pm, Rick Jones wrote:
In sci.space.history Pat Flannery wrote:

Carrying Astrobotic Technology Inc.'s rover:
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=32670

"with the robot narrating its adventure while sending 3D video" I
wonder if it will sound like the falling Whale in Hitchiker's Guide to
the Galaxy...

"will land softly, precisely and safely using technologies pioneered
by Carnegie Mellon University for guiding autonomous cars" you mean it
will be able to parallel park itself in a crater? *Back in my day,
there was a hyphen in the name Carnegie-Mellon University dang it -
although I suspect an even older timer will grouse "It's Carnegie Tech
dagnabit, and get off my lawn!"

Grousing aside - Go Tartan!

rick jones '88
--
I don't interest myself in "why." I think more often in terms of
"when," sometimes "where;" always "how much." *- Joubert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

theres a proposal for a fast moving rover that will circle the moon
out running darkness, so it could operate 24 / 7

theres a proposal for a fast moving rover that will circle the moon
out running darkness, so it could operate 24 / 7

OK so I'm I'm here on Earth, having trouble driving the local paved roads
because of the pot holes resulting from the last few snow storms and this
thing merrily drives around the moon like it's on the Pennsylvania Turnpike
when it was new at about 10 miles per hour. While it's trundling along at
this speed - what else does it do. Don't forget it'll be on the far side for
half the time. Maybe it's always on the Far Side.


Val Kraut

On Feb 8, 10:01*am, "Val Kraut" wrote:
theres a proposal for a fast moving rover that will circle the moon
out running darkness, so it could operate 24 / 7

OK so I'm I'm here on Earth, having trouble driving the local paved roads
because of the pot holes resulting from the last few snow storms and this
thing merrily drives around the moon like it's on the Pennsylvania Turnpike
when it was new at about 10 miles per hour. While it's trundling along at
this speed - what else does it do. Don't forget it'll be on the far side for
half the time. Maybe it's always on the Far Side.

* * Val Kraut

sending back close up photos of the terrain. maybe stumble onto the
apollo 11 LM upper stage, no one knows where it crashed.

Wonder if they will put up some communication satellites so rovers on
the back side of the moon will always be reachable.

the rover might land near a pole for easier traveling???

In sci.space.policy wrote:
theres a proposal for a fast moving rover that will circle the moon
out running darkness, so it could operate 24 / 7

It wouldn't have all that much time to stop and sniff the regolith
then. Not quite 3500 km diameter in a fortnight, 250 km per day.
Sure, less closer to the poles, but then the thing isn't likely to
travel in a straight line, there will no doubt be obstacles to be
driven around To have time to be able to do any "science" the thing
would have to zip along at something like 15 to 20 km/h if not
more. How would Gene Cernan take some robot beating his lunar land
speed record (*) of 18 km/h?-)

rick jones
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_rover_(Apollo)

--
Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

In sci.space.policy wrote:
On Feb 8, 12:53?pm, Rick Jones wrote:
In sci.space.policy wrote:

theres a proposal for a fast moving rover that will circle the moon
out running darkness, so it could operate 24 / 7

It wouldn't have all that much time to stop and sniff the regolith
then. ?Not quite 3500 km diameter in a fortnight, 250 km per day.
Sure, less closer to the poles, but then the thing isn't likely to
travel in a straight line, there will no doubt be obstacles to be
driven around To have time to be able to do any "science" the thing
would have to zip along at something like 15 to 20 km/h if not
more. ?How would Gene Cernan take some robot beating his lunar land
speed record (*) of 18 km/h?-)


add nuclear fuel and the rover could run 24/7 and the waste heat would
help keep it warm during nights

Then it wouldn't need to be chasing the daylight any longer, which
means it wouldn't have to be terribly fast, which means it would be
rather different than where we started...

rick jones
--
No need to believe in either side, or any side. There is no cause.
There's only yourself. The belief is in your own precision. - Joubert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

On Feb 8, 12:53*pm, Rick Jones wrote:
In sci.space.policy wrote:

theres a proposal for a fast moving rover that will circle the moon
out running darkness, so it could operate 24 / 7

It wouldn't have all that much time to stop and sniff the regolith
then. *Not quite 3500 km diameter in a fortnight, 250 km per day.
Sure, less closer to the poles, but then the thing isn't likely to
travel in a straight line, there will no doubt be obstacles to be
driven around To have time to be able to do any "science" the thing
would have to zip along at something like 15 to 20 km/h if not
more. *How would Gene Cernan take some robot beating his lunar land
speed record (*) of 18 km/h?-)

rick jones
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_rover_(Apollo)

--
Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

add nuclear fuel and the rover could run 24/7 and the waste heat would
help keep it warm during nights

On Feb 8, 5:49*pm, Rick Jones wrote:
In sci.space.policy wrote:





On Feb 8, 12:53?pm, Rick Jones wrote:
In sci.space.policy wrote:

theres a proposal for a fast moving rover that will circle the moon
out running darkness, so it could operate 24 / 7

It wouldn't have all that much time to stop and sniff the regolith
then. ?Not quite 3500 km diameter in a fortnight, 250 km per day.
Sure, less closer to the poles, but then the thing isn't likely to
travel in a straight line, there will no doubt be obstacles to be
driven around To have time to be able to do any "science" the thing
would have to zip along at something like 15 to 20 km/h if not
more. ?How would Gene Cernan take some robot beating his lunar land
speed record (*) of 18 km/h?-)
add nuclear fuel and the rover could run 24/7 and the waste heat would
help keep it warm during nights

Then it wouldn't need to be chasing the daylight any longer, which
means it wouldn't have to be terribly fast, which means it would be
rather different than where we started...

rick jones
--
No need to believe in either side, or any side. There is no cause.
There's only yourself. The belief is in your own precision. *- Joubert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

my point is there are different ways to accomplish robotic
exploration.

hey what about a solar sail reflector to provide light and solar power
to the rovers area.....

..
..
..
ALL the Press have already put apart the TRUE STORY of the
"""Google""" Lunar X Prize ....... http://x.co/GqFF
..
anyhow, there are some problems to win this prize
..
one Falcon-9 costs up to $56 millions but we must add the costs of the
rover, the lander and the Earth Departure Stage (the last two not yet
developed) for a total price of $65-70 millions (or much more)
..
but the winner will have only $20 millions (or only $15 millions) and
the second team only $5 millions
..
so, ALL the 21 GLXP teams and, most important, their funding sources,
must be ready to LOSE up to $50M (for the winner) or up to $65M (for
the second place team) and up to $70M each for ALL the 19 teams that
will arrive as 3rd and after the 3rd in this race
..
so, the TOTAL amount funded and LOST by the 21 teams and their funders
will be of up to $1.4 billions!!!
..
of course, the teams that understand to be unable to win, should stop
to run before they launch the rover with a $56M Falcon-9, but, the
total money LOST to develop all the rovers, landers and EDS, could
anyway be of over $300 millions!!!
..
also, if two-three of the GLXP teams already have the technology and
the funds to develop, build and launch their rovers, that means that,
up to 18 of the 21 GLXP teams ALREADY ARE TODAY OUT OF THE RACE, then,
this is NOT a TRUE moon-race where all competitors have the SAME
chances to win!!!
..
..
..