2 steps back to the Moon, one step forward?
-
I find the whole risks argument ridiculous. Life takes risk. The original airplane pilots took enourmous risks. What about sailors (early on)? And so on, and so forth. Yeah people may die. I'd gladly take that risk to be a part of a manned moon mission. And the longer we wrangle, and twist our fingers at the possibility over this, the more time we lose, and the less effective we are. I'm *not* saying we should be ignorant of safety issues. But I think we can let them blind us to getting the job done. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Here's a big question. What's to be gained in going back to the moon ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
I find the whole risks argument ridiculous. Life takes risk. The original airplane pilots took enourmous risks. What about sailors (early on)? And so on, and so forth. Yeah people may die. I'd gladly take that risk to be a part of a manned moon mission. And the longer we wrangle, and twist our fingers at the possibility over this, the more time we lose, and the less effective we are. I'm *not* saying we should be ignorant of safety issues. But I think we can let them blind us to getting the job done. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
I agree - but the focus groups that decide everything about our existence seem to think otherwise. '--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
Joe Woodbury wrote:
As has been said, though, as a nation we are absurdly risk averse.
We didn't use to be such a bunch of pussies. What the hell happened? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Jim Crafton wrote:
What the hell happened?
we're fat and lazy Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Here's a big question. What's to be gained in going back to the moon ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
I can think of 2 reasons off the top of my head 1) Because it's there. I suspect the act of expansion, or pushing ourselves to new frotniers is part of the human psyche. Obviously hard to figure out the precise ROI on that. 2) This is going to sound stupid, but here goes: what if something were to happen here on Earth that neccessitated leaving the planet? War, plague (man made or not), asteroid(? :wtf: ), who knows, but what if we needed the expertise to get off planet? Wouldn't it be awful sad if we were helpless to do anything about saving some part of the human race because we were too damn lazy to develop that part of our technology? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
I can think of 2 reasons off the top of my head 1) Because it's there. I suspect the act of expansion, or pushing ourselves to new frotniers is part of the human psyche. Obviously hard to figure out the precise ROI on that. 2) This is going to sound stupid, but here goes: what if something were to happen here on Earth that neccessitated leaving the planet? War, plague (man made or not), asteroid(? :wtf: ), who knows, but what if we needed the expertise to get off planet? Wouldn't it be awful sad if we were helpless to do anything about saving some part of the human race because we were too damn lazy to develop that part of our technology? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
1 - I see that as a real reason, but not one that is likely to generate funding if there are no Ruskies to beat you to it :-) 2 - How long do we expect to save any part of the human race ? How do we make life sustainable on the moon ? How do we decide who gets to go ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
Here's a big question. What's to be gained in going back to the moon ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
Christian Graus wrote:
What's to be gained in going back to the moon ?
It would be a humane way to reduce our rat population. :-)
... since we've descended to name calling, I'm thinking you're about twenty pounds of troll droppings in a ten pound bag. - Vincent Reynolds
-
If they failed in 60's it wouldn't really be a big deal, no one really expected them to pull it off anyway. Today, however, every time NASA fails, they face great criticism and embarrassment. Not to mention the risk of getting their funding cut. So, stakes are higher today for them IMO.
Bugra Barin wrote:
If they failed in 60's it wouldn't really be a big deal, no one really expected them to pull it off anyway.
I disagree - my understanding has always been that the Space Race was a metaphor for the Cold War in general, and had we failed, NASA would have been a national disgrace. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
1 - I see that as a real reason, but not one that is likely to generate funding if there are no Ruskies to beat you to it :-) 2 - How long do we expect to save any part of the human race ? How do we make life sustainable on the moon ? How do we decide who gets to go ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
Christian Graus wrote:
How long do we expect to save any part of the human race ? How do we make life sustainable on the moon ? How do we decide who gets to go ?
Who knows, but do we just all throw up our hands and say, gee these are some hard decisions, let's just give up? I don't know the exact answers but 40 years ago we managed to put people up there with the equivalent of a TI hand held calculator and a really big firecracker. With all of the incredible research being done, if people got their stuff together something could be worked out. I just find the utter indifference of the public, and the (apparent) inabiilty of NASA to discipline itself and accomplish goals really, really sad. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Jim Crafton wrote:
Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat?
The cost of the entire Apollo program: USD $25.4 billion -1969 Dollars ($135-billion in 2005 Dollars). See NASA Budget. (Includes Mercury, Gemini, Ranger, Surveyor, Lunar Orbitar, Apollo programs.) Apollo spacecraft and Saturn rocket cost alone, was about $ 83-billion 2005 Dollars (Apollo spacecraft cost $ 28-billion (CS/M $ 17-billion; LM $ 11-billion), Saturn I, IB, V costs about $ 46-billion 2005 dollars). Nasa's entire budget is less than the cost of one Apollo spacecraft in today's $$. 16.2 Billion was granted in 2005 for many NASA projects, not just "one". _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Jim Crafton wrote:
Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat?
The cost of the entire Apollo program: USD $25.4 billion -1969 Dollars ($135-billion in 2005 Dollars). See NASA Budget. (Includes Mercury, Gemini, Ranger, Surveyor, Lunar Orbitar, Apollo programs.) Apollo spacecraft and Saturn rocket cost alone, was about $ 83-billion 2005 Dollars (Apollo spacecraft cost $ 28-billion (CS/M $ 17-billion; LM $ 11-billion), Saturn I, IB, V costs about $ 46-billion 2005 dollars). Nasa's entire budget is less than the cost of one Apollo spacecraft in today's $$. 16.2 Billion was granted in 2005 for many NASA projects, not just "one". _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
OK, well that pretty much sucks. But what about this: in the 1960s weren't many of the materials and processes for building these vehicles less well known than they are now? Surely it's cheaper/easier to build this stuff now due to progress with technology? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
Bugra Barin wrote:
If they failed in 60's it wouldn't really be a big deal, no one really expected them to pull it off anyway.
I disagree - my understanding has always been that the Space Race was a metaphor for the Cold War in general, and had we failed, NASA would have been a national disgrace. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
I agree, there was national pride at the stake. But I disagree that NASA's failure would have been considered a disgrace. They were trying to accomplish something unthinkable, their failure would definitely have been forgiven I think. Just like a soccer goal-keeper facing a penalty kick. No one expects him to save the goal, but if he does, he is a hero :)
-
OK, well that pretty much sucks. But what about this: in the 1960s weren't many of the materials and processes for building these vehicles less well known than they are now? Surely it's cheaper/easier to build this stuff now due to progress with technology? ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Jim Crafton wrote:
OK, well that pretty much sucks. But what about this: in the 1960s weren't many of the materials and processes for building these vehicles less well known than they are now? Surely it's cheaper/easier to build this stuff now due to progress with technology?
Yup, tooth brushes are common place, tang is found everywhere, vaccuums are powered by engines that used to recycle air.... but the large thrusters have been toned down for smaller orbital thrusters, fuel cells have made little or no progress until recent interest as an alternative to gasoline (they just dropped off the tech market for 30 years and then returned). If anything we have "gained some and lost some," the net result is we are not much better off than we were then. The fuels we use and engines we use do not have the thrust to reach the moon rapidly, and the structures we built use less viable materials such that the stresses would tear them apart. Heat shielding is far improved, but quality control in that product has had... issues. Long term slow burn engines have completely replaced the older faster burn heavy thrust engines of the past. We could make it to the moon with todays technology, and have with recent moon probes, but they took much longer and we could never carry enough food to last that long. Basically we are pretty much starting over again because the technology has been extremely focused to save money. I am not saying that was a bad thing, but you can't use an airbreathing engine to power a submarine.... and you can't reach the moon on low-orbit technology. If anything we have extreme difficulty even reaching high-orbit anymore and fail quite readily and often just doing that much. in short: we have "mastered" Mercury program technology, we are struggling even now with Gemini technology, and we completely forgot how to do Apollo technology. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb) -- modified at 15:40 Wednesday 15th March, 2006
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
What really gets me is that they are cutting the budget for space telscopes that would be able to find Earth like planets around other stars. If you want to inspire a real desire to send a human into space it is to find another Earth. Once we find that the desire to send humans into space will be too great to ignore.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Christian Graus wrote:
What's to be gained in going back to the moon ?
It would be a humane way to reduce our rat population. :-)
... since we've descended to name calling, I'm thinking you're about twenty pounds of troll droppings in a ten pound bag. - Vincent Reynolds
Alvaro Mendez wrote:
It would be a humane way to reduce our rat population.
Or the lawyer population ;)
Ryan
"Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"
-
I find the whole risks argument ridiculous. Life takes risk. The original airplane pilots took enourmous risks. What about sailors (early on)? And so on, and so forth. Yeah people may die. I'd gladly take that risk to be a part of a manned moon mission. And the longer we wrangle, and twist our fingers at the possibility over this, the more time we lose, and the less effective we are. I'm *not* saying we should be ignorant of safety issues. But I think we can let them blind us to getting the job done. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Jim Crafton wrote:
I find the whole risks argument ridiculous. Life takes risk.
That is true. However, in the current legal climate, if anything goes wrong (even if someone gets the flu :~ ), NASA will get sued for ridiculous amounts of money. I imagine they want to make sure there is absolutely no possibility that anything will go wrong.
Ryan
"Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"
-
Christian Graus wrote:
How long do we expect to save any part of the human race ? How do we make life sustainable on the moon ? How do we decide who gets to go ?
Who knows, but do we just all throw up our hands and say, gee these are some hard decisions, let's just give up? I don't know the exact answers but 40 years ago we managed to put people up there with the equivalent of a TI hand held calculator and a really big firecracker. With all of the incredible research being done, if people got their stuff together something could be worked out. I just find the utter indifference of the public, and the (apparent) inabiilty of NASA to discipline itself and accomplish goals really, really sad. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Jim Crafton wrote:
inabiilty of NASA to discipline itself and accomplish goals
I've got to respectfully disagree with that statement. Keep in mind NASA is doing many many more projects now then they were doing when they did the first moon shot .. and all those programs must be kept running as well. Of course there is waste, as there is in all government, but I think NASA is doing really well with the limited resources we give them. "We need less government, not more. The idea that we can become a better society by having a bigger rule book is ridiculous, regardless of who is trying to change the rules" - Doug Goulden
-
Didn't the Bush administration just announce a huge round of funding for Nasa along with the plan for a Mars mission? I recall all the peanut gallery over at Slashdot saying the government is spending too much money and shouldn't be wasting it on Nasa.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Moral Muscle The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote:
Didn't the Bush administration just announce a huge round of funding for Nasa
Nope, Bush said NASA had to do it without increased funding ... they have to, and have been, cutting other programs. "We need less government, not more. The idea that we can become a better society by having a bigger rule book is ridiculous, regardless of who is trying to change the rules" - Doug Goulden
-
Judah Himango wrote:
Didn't the Bush administration just announce a huge round of funding for Nasa
Nope, Bush said NASA had to do it without increased funding ... they have to, and have been, cutting other programs. "We need less government, not more. The idea that we can become a better society by having a bigger rule book is ridiculous, regardless of who is trying to change the rules" - Doug Goulden
Are you sure about that? Bush seeks $1 billion more in NASA funding[^]
-
First off: I am not a rocket scientist. In fact I'm not a scientist at all. So maybe I'm being a bit unfair, but when I read this: http://blog.wired.com/nasacev/[^] They say "NASA has recently announced plans for a manned mission to the moon in 2018." Huh? JFK was elected in 1960. Shortly thereafter he makes some speech about wanting a manned lunar mission before the 1960s are out. In 1969 we land on the moon. In *9* years we pull this off. How on earth does NASA require 12 friggin years to duplicate the feat? OK, yes they want this re-usable. Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically? Other than silly politics why would take so long? Why is there no at NASA that can just say "Make this happen". To me this reads as if we are literally starting from scratch. Sad :( ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Jim Crafton wrote:
OK, yes they want this re-usable.
Yes,
Jim Crafton wrote:
Fine, I can see that being more complex, but good lord, isn't it true that in virtually every single area that would be related to this mission we have made massive advances technologically?
NO! Having spent 10 years on the X-30 project. I can promise you this little advancement is far from trivial. Also as others have pointed out the acceptance of some failures is just no longer tolerated. THAT is what caused the cancellation of the X-30 by the way. We could not GAURANTEE the first flight of the first vehicle would be orbital. Engine burn efficiencies and materials to withstand the heat from modified trajectories have a ways to go. "Every new day begins with possibilities. It's up to us to fill it with things that move us toward progress and peace.” (Ronald Reagan) -- modified at 21:33 Wednesday 15th March, 2006
-
Jim Crafton wrote:
inabiilty of NASA to discipline itself and accomplish goals
I've got to respectfully disagree with that statement. Keep in mind NASA is doing many many more projects now then they were doing when they did the first moon shot .. and all those programs must be kept running as well. Of course there is waste, as there is in all government, but I think NASA is doing really well with the limited resources we give them. "We need less government, not more. The idea that we can become a better society by having a bigger rule book is ridiculous, regardless of who is trying to change the rules" - Doug Goulden
David Patrick wrote:
Keep in mind NASA is doing many many more projects now then they were doing when they did the first moon shot
Yeah I know. I'd argue that perhaps it's doing too many. Or maybe not. But I think, or suspect there could be some trimming. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!