Does anyone know when the new missions to the moon are beginning?
Also
Does anyone think that we will see the first permanent residents on the moon within our lifetimes (I know that is a little vague because there are people of many different ages on this site, but that does not matter) ?
Heres a question Why go back to the moon? We've have already been there, there will be nothing gained at this point in history. we don't have the technology to make regaler round trips to the moon. At this point in history theres no reason to go back to the moon. A better use for the money would be to launch a replacement for Hubble and developing a cheaper more efficient way f getting intro orbit.
true, but I think the idea is to find out what we would be able to do on the moon in the future. It is also supposed to be used for training for later missions to Mars. The thing is there is a lot we need to find out about the moon to see if it is worth more visits or permanent settling. The thing is also that this is probably not the only thing NASA plans on doing in the future. There will probably be more major missions than just the ones to the moon.
a trip to the moon in these days would not be so usefull, they gatered like 150 pounds of rocks for study, no more rocks needed, they showed the soviets that they rule (im not american but i dont like comunism) but the moon could have a lot of uses, like puting a giant antenna or something like that, it could do a lot of tings.
NASA is working on it.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9355479/
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON - NASA briefed senior White House officials Wednesday on its plan to spend $100 billion and the next 12 years building the spacecraft and rockets it needs to put humans back on the Moon by 2018.
The U.S. space agency now expects to roll out its lunar exploration plan to key Congressional committees on Friday and to the broader public through a news conference on Monday, Washington sources tell SPACE.com. |
and here is why:
| Quote: |
NASA’s plan envisions being able to land four-person human crews anywhere on the Moon’s surface and to eventually use the system to transport crew members to and from a lunar outpost that it would consider building on the lunar south pole, according to the charts, because of the regions elevated quantities of hydrogen and possibly water ice.
One of NASA’s reasons for going back to the moon is to demonstrate that astronauts can essentially “live off the land” by using lunar resources to produce potable water, fuel and other valuable commodities. Such capabilities are considered extremely important to human expeditions to Mars which, because of the distances involved, would be much longer missions entailing a minimum of 500 days spent on the planet’s surface. |
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| A better use for the money would be... developing a cheaper more efficient way f getting intro orbit. |
Such as launching from the moon, with 1/6 of the gravity?
