MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
Sticking one’s ass out the window of a moving vehicle isn’t owned by anyone.
Moonshot
- Thread starter Half Fast
- Start date
There won't be any 'moonbase' for centuries. If ever. The cost per kilo to lift stuff to the moon and get the people and delivery back here is more than the US, China, Russia, Japan, India, UK and a few others can afford - combined. There is no O2 in the lunar atmosphere, Which means, we have to take it all, and we have to have a converter to strip the C off the CO2 and leave just fresh O2. And we have to have it redundant. Maybe triple redundant. There is also energy. Gotta take a high concentrated energy source like a small nuke reactor. Maybe 2 of those.
The energy involved in a moonbase is just pie in the sky thinking. I don't care if China goes there. Let them. From what I've heard, seen, there's no money to be made. What would be real cool is to let China establish a moonbase - at their cost, and THEN send some US astronauts up and knock on their moonbase door; 'Hi, we're from the US, and we'd like to come in and check out the moonbase. Because the moon is public domain'. See what they say.
The energy involved in a moonbase is just pie in the sky thinking. I don't care if China goes there. Let them. From what I've heard, seen, there's no money to be made. What would be real cool is to let China establish a moonbase - at their cost, and THEN send some US astronauts up and knock on their moonbase door; 'Hi, we're from the US, and we'd like to come in and check out the moonbase. Because the moon is public domain'. See what they say.
Good news. We don't have to worry about that. Going back to the moon is an expensive boondoggle, not an investment that is going to yield a return. We, and they, should be spending our dollars and yuans on other things.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
Same reason “new” pilots don’t get flying a cub or a stearman. They’re just more interested pushing buttons and letting the GPS navigate for them.
2-Bit Speed
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2021
- Messages
- 2,137
- Display Name
- 2-Bit Speed
That exists. It's used in rebreathers. It's called "Sorb."
Still, more weight to carry up there.
Half Fast
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 7, 2016
- Messages
- 21,187
- Location
- Central Florida
- Display Name
- Half Fast
- Home Airfield
- KGIF
AFAIK, only one nation has stuck a flag in the lunar soil.
wanttaja
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 5,667
- Location
- "War-Torn" Portland
- Display Name
- Ron Wanttaja
- Home Airfield
- Twin Oaks Airpark
I've been told the Chinese want to mine Helium-3, a clean, non-radioactive fuel for fusion reactors.
Ron Wanttaja
Jim_R
En-Route
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2,567
- Display Name
- Jim
Sure. Now ask the Ukranians how well planting a flag works to ensure that someone doesn't come and take your land.
I, for one, am looking forward to the First Lunar War
eman1200
Touchdown! Greaser!
So technically, I could open a Burger King on the moon and claim the entire moon is my parking lot and then own the moon. I win.
The BBC has put Artemis coverage ahead of football, so it must be something of note.
midwestpa24
Final Approach
My father worked on the original Apollo program. He worked for Boeing as an electrical technician building the first stage of the Saturn V rockets. He even helped buck rivets on the first rockets while their electrical shop was being built. When the SLS was first announced as the most powerful rocket ever built, my dad was interested until he discovered all they are doing is recycling old Shuttle engines and just putting more of them.
wanttaja
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 5,667
- Location
- "War-Torn" Portland
- Display Name
- Ron Wanttaja
- Home Airfield
- Twin Oaks Airpark
We could go all traditionalist here, and allow that sovereignty depends on your ability to defend. The terrestrial "Three Mile Limit" was based on the distance a 19th century cannon could theoretically shoot. The lunar horizon is only ~1.5 miles away, so a ground mounted laser could only protect to within that distance. A little height, of course, helps.
Ron Wanttaja
I recommend doing just a tiny bit of calorimitry for those processes to extract usable O2. Vacuum pyroylsis would be the preferred lunar method, as the moon is nearly a vacuum already. But, still needs a metric ****-ton of energy. Better take four reactors if one is going to generate any useable O2 from these methods.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 2,595
- Display Name
- Jon
- Home Airfield
- KCMA
Not his fault...
Brad Smith
En-Route
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,575
- Display Name
- Brad Smith
I just read that technical the knowledge is doubling every 12 hours. Landing on the moon in 2026 should be as easy as driving your car to the park for a picnic and returning home couple hours later. Maybe NASA needs to upgrade that IBM System/360?
At the risk of starting a flame war(I dislike quoting people), vision is vision. Money is money. In my 50 year career, I have three personal patents, and worked with a crew that has another 6 or so industrial/electronic patents. Vision to hypothesize, design, build, test, refine, test, and produce takes money. If the Private Equity crowd wants to go to the moon, extract whatever chemistry, or rare lunars or just for amusement and vacation I am all for it.
We've paid, and paid again, and paid once more(with interest) the vision of those men who went to the moon in the 60s. The vision was costly, as big projects usually are. To me - vision would be Artemis going to Mars(which was in some sources, the original plan). I'd pony up some tax bux to get to Mars and back. IMNSHO - what Artemis is doing is looking in the rear view mirror for their 're-vision'.
To steal from my fave Sci-Fi franchise: "To boldly go, where no man has gone before." The US has played golf, and driven a dune buggy on the moon. Job done. And, I didn't violate the rules of conduct in my response.
Well said. The way I would put it is that we've already proven both that we can put people on the moon and that it was a waste of time. We haven't yet done either for mars. If we're going to throw away money on manned spacecraft, let's at least waste it in new ways.
In case I'm being too subtle about my opinion: I would much rather take the budget for a single manned mission and fund 10-20 robotic missions.
Larry in TN
En-Route
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,433
- Location
- Nashville, TN
- Display Name
- Larry in TN
- Home Airfield
- ORD
H-3 was the basis for the moon base in the movie Moon. Well worth watching for those who haven't seen it. It's available to stream free, with ads, from Tubi or rent or buy from Amazon, AppleTV, and Fandango.
NASA definition:
As of 2021 in the United States, astronaut status is conferred on a person depending on the authorizing agency: one who flies in a vehicle above 50 miles (80 km) for NASA or the military is considered an astronaut.
FAA defintion:
Safety Contribution: To receive Commercial Space Astronaut Wings, individuals must demonstrate activity during the flight that is "essential to public safety, or contributed to human space flight safety".
Crew vs. Participant:The new rules differentiate between trained "flight crew" and "spaceflight participants" (tourists)
The US is engage in many other activities incurring billions of debt with little or no benefit. At least the NASA and the space program in general has many positive outcomes, some already demonstrated, others are planned. Without the space program we wouldn't have
- Research in microgravity fast-tracking developments in materials science, human health (such as cancer treatments), and biology.
- Water purification systems, LED lighting, solar panels, and satellite communications
- Satellites provide crucial data on climate change, pollution, and natural disasters, assisting with environmental management.
- SpaceX
Anticipated mining/use of asteroid and moon materials as mentioned in another posting.
Not to mention Tang.
NASA's budget is miniscule in the grand scheme of things.
Anything else will get me banned.
There are times, it's worth it to get banned, and I'm close. My software is on the 2nd stage of Artemis - the ICPS (interim cryogenic propulsion stage). Rocket software is the most boring software I ever worked on (other than banking) until the button is pushed (there's really no button) and the rocket launches. Then it's not boring at all.
Heinlein once claimed a moon base would result in a cheap war - it's just throwing rocks down the gravity well.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 27,381
- Display Name
- Bob Noel
- Home Airfield
- KBED
If anyone thinks that was the job, well. 'tis sad.
Lindberg
Final Approach
I do love that we have such smart and visionary posters here that they always know more than the actual experts, but I have a serious question:
If Artemis I already did this with an empty capsule, what's gained by doing it again with people in the capsule? Why not just move on to the next step?
If Artemis I already did this with an empty capsule, what's gained by doing it again with people in the capsule? Why not just move on to the next step?
You knew it was satirical. Everyone on this board knew it was satirical, even a 12 year old reading the whole para could pick up on the satire involved.
So, being intentionally obtuse is troll behavior.
Now, on to the incredibly important, serious, and world shaking developments of Artemis:
Meet the California 8-year-old whose plushie is going on Artemis II
RISE — a plushie designed by 8-year-old Lucas Ye — is joining four astronauts in space aboard Artemis II, which is set to launch Wednesday.
The program has an official plushie. (not satire, this time all the way to sarcasm)
wanttaja
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 5,667
- Location
- "War-Torn" Portland
- Display Name
- Ron Wanttaja
- Home Airfield
- Twin Oaks Airpark
Yeee-Haaa!
Membership in the Association of Space Explorers (the international organization for astronauts/cosmonauts) is limited to those who have flown at least one orbit around the Earth in a spacecraft. So the "up-and-down" crowd need not apply.
They had their annual convention in Seattle eighteen years ago. Boeing was sponsoring the banquet, and found they had some extra seats. So the call went out for employees who wouldn't mind renting a tux and showing up for a free meal.....
It was a fascinating experience. There were astronauts/cosmonauts at every table during the banquet. Even recognized a few on sight.
Mind you, folks tell me the above photo makes it look like I'm a bouncer......
Ron "Go for TLI" Wanttaja
Jim_R
En-Route
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2,567
- Display Name
- Jim
Artemis I proved the guidance, propellant, communications, computer, and structural systems, including reentry and safe landing. Artemis II will add life support and manual crew control to the list of proven capabilities. (More details here.)
NASA can't move on to the next step because SpaceX and Blue Origin aren't ready to fly their landers, and won't be for a while.
Lindberg
Final Approach
They couldn't test the life-support systems without sticking people in there and seeing if they die? Brutal.
You're likely the smartest guy on the board. And it bothers me that you take my lack of Artemis support personally, as if I'm trying to take your job away, or minimize the commitment of thousands of people who've contributed to the program. Minimizing the cost of the NASA program by mentioning or referring to other wasteful programs is just obscuration. NASA and pre-NASA had bold beginnings, and bold goals, and plans.
You mention some of your contributions in plenty of posts here. That's great and I'm happy that you are making any program better with your time and energy. This is not to abuse you of your contributions, but all programs whose budget starts with a B is fair game. NASA has been taken over by inertia to the point of stagnation the same as Boeing. There's been great effort recently to axe programs, and departments in govt that are wasteful, and I'm actually shocked that NASA has slid by with very few scratches.
I rail against wasteful spending in many ways, with many programs(within the limits of the ROC), and I'm not going to single out NASA for special treatment. Artemis is possibly the worst of the NASA programs that could be funded. Like I said, and it bears repeating, there are plenty of things NASA could and should focus on other than going where we've already been, and developing all those great things we've already developed that you point out. If there's something revolutionary in Artemis, let me know. It all seems barely evolutionary to me, and I'd prefer that we leave 'been there, done that' to private equity.
455 Bravo Uniform
Final Approach
I don’t discount the possibility. Senior engineer with the current program doesn’t believe it based on the engineering difficulties. We are either more inept today (more probable than not, lol), or the originals were not 100% real.
Jim_R
En-Route
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2,567
- Display Name
- Jim
Oh good grief.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 27,381
- Display Name
- Bob Noel
- Home Airfield
- KBED
consider the challenge of simulating all the things that 4 biological units would do during the flight, consuming O2, producing CO2 (and waste products), moving around, heat load, etc etc etc.
I wonder if the mission is simply for the 4 astronauts to have a ride... I think not.
Artemis II: Scientific research during the mission
During their mission to the Moon, the Artemis II astronauts participated in five studies that explore how deep-space travel affects the human body, mind and behaviour.
Artemis II Science - NASA
Artemis II science lays the foundation for safe and efficient human exploration of the Moon and Mars, from human health to geology.
www.nasa.gov
Lindberg
Final Approach
So basically, stick them in there and see if they die.consider the challenge of simulating all the things that 4 biological units would do during the flight, consuming O2, producing CO2 (and waste products), moving around, heat load, etc etc etc.
I wonder if the mission is simply for the 4 astronauts to have a ride... I think not.
Artemis II: Scientific research during the mission
During their mission to the Moon, the Artemis II astronauts participated in five studies that explore how deep-space travel affects the human body, mind and behaviour.www.asc-csa.gc.ca
Artemis II Science - NASA
Artemis II science lays the foundation for safe and efficient human exploration of the Moon and Mars, from human health to geology.
Jim_R
En-Route
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2,567
- Display Name
- Jim
Yes. You got it. That's exactly what it is.
Because there's no gray space in this world. Everything is digital--zero or one, pass or fail. Things can't ever mostly work. They just either do or they don't.
Charlie Golf
En-Route
I thought the science was settled.
455 Bravo Uniform
Final Approach
I’m not asking anyone else to believe it, nor am I saying that I even do. I’m repeating what I heard first-hand from an elder Artemis engineer.Oh good grief.
What would explain why as advanced as we are 60 years later that it’s so darn difficult? Either we are less great than our predecessors (which I believe) or the actual human touch and return may not have happened. Do you have to only believe one of these two?
I am scientific enough to not be certain of either opinion.