Wow, A permanent station on the moon...Does anyone think it's useful into understanding the sciences of space better?
From CBC
| Quote: |
At one time the moon was a nice place to visit. Now NASA has decided it wants people to live there.
"We're going for a base on the moon," said Scott (Doc) Horowitz, NASA's associate administrator for exploration, in a teleconference from the Johnson Space Center in Houston on Monday.
A four-person crew will land in 2020 to start building the lunar base, shown here in an artist's rendering.A four-person crew will land in 2020 to start building the lunar base, shown here in an artist's rendering.
(NASA, John Frassanito and Associates/Associated Press)
The space agency announced plans to build a base on the moon and permanently staff it by 2024, with astronauts staying for up to six months at a time.
The habitat will most likely be built on the moon's south pole and will serve as a science outpost and test centre for technologies needed for future expeditions to Mars.
The ambitious plan is considered the next phase of space exploration after space shuttles are retired in 2010. It will also take some time to get going. Construction of the base is not set to begin until the first series of flights to the moon scheduled for 2020.
The location of the base is a departure from the Apollo missions of the 1960s, when astronauts landed in the middle area of the moon.
|
Quote tags added. Please use these tags whenever posting writing that is not your own. - Moderating Team
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2006/12/05/moon-base.html Cool, this is the future we all spected, we are in the future now so bring the lunar bases and the teleportation too. I think it is cool and just for the fact that there will be extraterrestrial places to live is worth all the money, I think it is a luxury to the humankind.
sounds pretty crazy. Just imagine how much will go into that. I think it's definitely cool, but I don't know that it's necessary.
| carlospro7 wrote: |
| sounds pretty crazy. Just imagine how much will go into that. I think it's definitely cool, but I don't know that it's necessary. |
how much?
does it really expensive? | palavra wrote: |
| carlospro7 wrote: | | sounds pretty crazy. Just imagine how much will go into that. I think it's definitely cool, but I don't know that it's necessary. |
how much?
does it really expensive? |
loldon't lol
of course i know it is expensive for me. 
but for nasa ?
why they wait up to 2020? Plans are still being made, It is unknown the cost of the moon base. But it I geuess it will be way expensive even for NASA.
I think it is a very exciting time. Actually thinking of setting a base on the moon was unheard of many years ago.
However this will possible also help to prove or disprove the fact of if we ever went to the moon during the space race.
| Talk2Tom11 wrote: |
I think it is a very exciting time. Actually thinking of setting a base on the moon was unheard of many years ago.
|
It was unheard of last year. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Talk2Tom11 wrote: | I think it is a very exciting time. Actually thinking of setting a base on the moon was unheard of many years ago.
|
It was unheard of last year. |
Actually it's not. The planning dates to at least President Bush's speech in January 2004. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040114-3.html)
But I am sure the President didn't make that stuff up off the top of his head, so the planning probably predates that. 
Here is a link to the Constellation Program, NASA's plan for the moon and related vehicles: Constellation
Respectfully,
MThis could be very cool indeed! Although, I'm sure it will be just as costly. I could just imagine a family living on the moon... imagine for sure, but one day, this may become a reality, which is just awesomely far out for me! I'll be keeping an eye out for news on this topic, because once (if) it gets started, I think other countries might begin vieing for land and the like on the moon. Interstellar warfare FTW!
Well, okay... maybe I'm getting ahead of myself.
GotD.
just what we need, another colonialism age! At least we learned not to colonize Antarctica, can't we learn not to colonize the moon? The only application for a moon base that I see is another Hubble telescope on the dark side of the moon.
| Talk2Tom11 wrote: |
| However this will possible also help to prove or disprove the fact of if we ever went to the moon during the space race. |
Yeah, I thought of this one too. During the 60's race, some people says the Apollo 11's landing on the moon is just a hoax. By the time the lunar base is completely constructed is the time to prove all that and also a first step of having bases to other planets / moons. I really won't bother thinking how much or how expensive the project is because the fact that space missions are really such, expensive. Getting a lot of the percentage of the whole national budget (as of that of Military). | Moonspider wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | Talk2Tom11 wrote: | I think it is a very exciting time. Actually thinking of setting a base on the moon was unheard of many years ago.
|
It was unheard of last year. |
Actually it's not. The planning dates to at least President Bush's speech in January 2004.
M |
Fine, it was unheard of 3 years ago, that better? | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Moonspider wrote: | | ocalhoun wrote: | | Talk2Tom11 wrote: | I think it is a very exciting time. Actually thinking of setting a base on the moon was unheard of many years ago.
|
It was unheard of last year. |
Actually it's not. The planning dates to at least President Bush's speech in January 2004.
M |
Fine, it was unheard of 3 years ago, that better? |
Yeah. sure. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| Fine, it was unheard of 3 years ago, that better? |
Depends on how you define "heard", if you read any science fiction I'm sure that you realize that permanent bases on the moon have not been just a recent topic, though it has just relatively recently become a topic of somewhat serious discussion with policymakers.
Another topic of discussion would be are we motivated enough to spend that much effort (and money) to get a base on the moon? Last time we had the Godless Communists for competition, somehow I think justifying a multi-billion dollar expenditure will take more that saying "9-11" and "terrorism" (this time). Even though there are many reasonable scientific benefits from such a base, I don't think that that is enough to endear the project to your average American.
Makes you wonder what the United Nations Space Treaty would say on this subject.Wow!!!
What a great news, finally human can permanent live in non-earth area.
But why need wait 2020 and only available for 4person only?
As i know moon got water can support human can live up to 100 years.
It's about time.
Yes, it may be expensive, but I think it is necessary. We need to learn to live off of our home planet. Mother Nature has been great to us, but it's time we moved out of the house.
Peaceninja, what's wrong with colonization? Our species needs to explore and expand to advance. There are no indigenous peoples or lifeforms on the moon to displace, it's a dead rock.
Si-fi fans have been dreaming of a moon colony since the fifties. This is the first step toward mining in the asteroid belt, colonizing Mars, and, eventally, extrasolar exploration.
What real benefits could a moon colony have? Well, the space program has already given us advanced plastics, fuel cells, and countless other technologies that we use everyday and don't even realise.
No, imagine the joy of environmentalists when all the metal-ore mines on the planet close down because it's more cost effecent to mine all that stuff from an asteroid and drop it from orbit.
Of course it will take time to get to that point, and a vast investment of money and resources. But then, very few things that are worth doing are easy.
The moon base specifically? well, think about all the data we get from satilites about our climate. Now, imagine a human being, with all his or her pattern recognizing ability, intuition and imagination, able to devote large amounts of time to studying cloud movements from above. What might that person learn that we couldn't see from here below the clouds?
(this is just an off the cuff example, I'm sure I could think of something better with a little time 
)
Also, imagine the experience we will get in living in self-contained, self-suporting environments. Now, imagine that an asteroid is comming, and we have two years to prepare. With what we have learned from living on the moon, wouldn't it be that much easier for us here on earth to design and build underground, self-contained habitats to survive in until the asteroid induced ice-age passes and the surface becomes habitable again.
See... many good reasons to have a moon base. 
it's useless man....whats a moon space gonna bring to us? nothing. they just need to waste their money on something. I bet you NASA has unthinkable technology that we don't imagine. They just wont tell us. And they things start to get suspicious.......they come up with these bright ideas! 
It's stupid I love the idea of a station on the moon. And that is also the stepping stone to a base on Mars.
I know a lot of people complain about the cost, but it goes way beyond the monetary cost. The value to mankind far outweighs that. Look at all of the technologies that are in use everyday today because of the space programs (hint: you are using one right now).
Why wait so long? But I guess with building a space outpost there surely would be a lot of preperation needed, so in this case I suppose it's understandable that construction is still 13 years away.
Does anyone know what the phrase "space shuttled retiring in 2010" means? Are they getting rid of space shuttles as we know, or what? That phrase confused me slightly.
Sounds quite ambitious, I hope it serves a good purpose.
Bush wants the US to go to the moon, by the way.
| Soulfire wrote: |
Why wait so long? But I guess with building a space outpost there surely would be a lot of preperation needed, so in this case I suppose it's understandable that construction is still 13 years away.
Does anyone know what the phrase "space shuttled retiring in 2010" means? Are they getting rid of space shuttles as we know, or what? That phrase confused me slightly.
Sounds quite ambitious, I hope it serves a good purpose. |
Yes, they are retiring the whole shuttle fleet as soon as the space station is complete, in 2010. They will be changing over to a capsule design, larger and more up to date than the Apollo capsules, but similar.
That is one of the reasons the moon base has been put off so long. The ISS needs to be finished first, the shuttles, especially the cargo capacity and robot arm, are vital to that job. They were made for work in orbit. The new capsules will be better for moon trips.
The reason they are retiring the shuttles is because they are aging. They are based on 25 year old technology, and updating them completely would be too expensive. There is also the safety factor, the design is too complex, which means more things can go wrong, and, as Murphy's law states, "Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong eventually."
I recomend surfing over to the NASA site, they have timelines and explanations of the plan all the way to Mars. | vynes18 wrote: |
Wow!!!
What a great news, finally human can permanent live in non-earth area.
But why need wait 2020 and only available for 4person only?
As i know moon got water can support human can live up to 100 years. |
Safety comes first, no Country is going to send a man to the moon or something just because they will be the first, of course that is their goal, but it's common sense to not take huge risk.
Once in Space, if anything goes wrong, there is little that can be done. We haven't gone to the point where we can rescue a man in space in a minute. If something goes wrong, it's more of an embarassment than an achievement.
THe reason why 2020 or so will be the launch date is because of the many phases required to achieve the goals.
First because no one has ever inhabitated any planet other than the earth, they have to plan every aspect of the astronauts life, they have to ensure that the waste they will create is disposed somehow, then they will have to stage the support aspect, how will they get food? how will they live? etc. questions like that, which have to be tested on earth.
I know it's long, but it's not easy when your the first to do something. By the time the first mission is succesful, the timeframe to expand the moon colony will be shortened because the hardest part has already been achieve, the research has been done and all that's left is the work on the next generation components.i think they are beeing really slow with this theme. it's been ages sins they put that "feet in the moon".. they should have done it years ago. i don't know.. maybe.. what they said is not real.. maybe they didn't go to the moon in that age... maybe some years laters... and they finished their research just now.. anyway. interesting article
Mixed thoughts.
It opens doors to say, we can stop at the moon before going on to Mars or other planets. However, it is quite expensive and I can't see any major benifits for that cost.
| alkady wrote: |
Safety comes first, no Country is going to send a man to the moon or something just because they will be the first, of course that is their goal, but it's common sense to not take huge risk.
|
Um, the space race?
Every mission into space is a huge risk. Think of all the missions that have gone wrong - and spectacularly so. There's very little room for error, as every mistake is a huge 'risk'.
A colony on the moon in itself does not seem to have any huge advantage, but being able to use the colony as a jumping point to better explore the solar system definitely makes sense. Eventually a colony on Mars: now there's a thought!It seems funny to me that NASA is planning to go back to the moon, but also facing cutbacks to its science program (some $3 billion over 5 years). It seems to me this is a case of politicians who want to make the headlines, but gut the much more useful programs.
Well that's right. What about health, education etc. which can always be improved?
Sweet! A moon station. It does seem like such a far off notion. Maybe it's just because I'm a trekkie, but if we could come up with some sort of technology, such as terraforming, etc., then we could eventually colonize other worlds, which would of course solve lots of our problems. It may be crazy, but maybe this moon station is the first step towards that future.
That's a great news for me. Indeed I hope that one day I can visit moon like vist the city near my home ^_^
| theLOGANhole wrote: |
Wow, A permanent station on the moon...Does anyone think it's useful into understanding the sciences of space better?
From CBC
| Quote: | At one time the moon was a nice place to visit. Now NASA has decided it wants people to live there.
"We're going for a base on the moon," said Scott (Doc) Horowitz, NASA's associate administrator for exploration, in a teleconference from the Johnson Space Center in Houston on Monday.
A four-person crew will land in 2020 to start building the lunar base, shown here in an artist's rendering.A four-person crew will land in 2020 to start building the lunar base, shown here in an artist's rendering.
(NASA, John Frassanito and Associates/Associated Press)
The space agency announced plans to build a base on the moon and permanently staff it by 2024, with astronauts staying for up to six months at a time.
The habitat will most likely be built on the moon's south pole and will serve as a science outpost and test centre for technologies needed for future expeditions to Mars.
The ambitious plan is considered the next phase of space exploration after space shuttles are retired in 2010. It will also take some time to get going. Construction of the base is not set to begin until the first series of flights to the moon scheduled for 2020.
The location of the base is a departure from the Apollo missions of the 1960s, when astronauts landed in the middle area of the moon.
|
Quote tags added. Please use these tags whenever posting writing that is not your own. - Moderating Team
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2006/12/05/moon-base.html |
I’ve always been a fan and a supporter of scientific exploration. Plans are plans though and the actual use of a space station on the moon is dependent on the imagination of those involved.
I think the spin off’s of landing on the moon in the past was worth the effort. It created jobs, new advances in technology and inspirational rewards as well. Sure as far as money is concerned its a lot to spend but what is money after all, wars consume it too!
The argument for the value of what is achieved for the effort could be discussed as there are always needs on earth as well. It definitely seems more glamorous going to the moon than to feed third world children for example. What is the purpose of the station?
From a strictly scientific viewpoint if the moon could be used as a stop over launcher then it could be a door way to further explorations I guess. What is needed however are plans and budget allocations that allow for positive steps.
In other words it is not useful to build a space station that will need maintenance and not have a rewarding purpose for it. If there is a follow up to have useful scientific experiments there or launches or whatever in the station then it would merely not be another dead venture.
Part of the equation is to have enough support. If lots of people don’t get excited about something then it kind of useless plan in my opinion. Being an optimist, I would like to think of a world where a space station through some miracle I guess would find a cure for a world wide disease or help create peace, a strong economy or just do something for mankind that is worthwhile. After all is said and done that is what made the star trek series so popular at one time. A Vulcan greeting.
