DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Space » Moon shine

Moon shine

If you believe they put a man on the moon …
… or even (especially?) if you don’t, this one’s for you.
In 2008, NASA says it will send a “Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter” into low orbit around the moon. While it’s primary mission will be to scout for the next manned lunar mission (ostensibly planned for around 2020), it also will do something to defeat those wacky conspiracy theories about how and why the United Stats allegedly faked its moon missions.
It’s going to photograph what astronauts left on the moon, “providing the first recognizable images of Apollo relics since 1972,” NASA says.
landingsites_270b.gif
There are six landing sites scattered across the moon’s surface, but even the Hubble telescope can’t photograph them.
Apparently, NASA says, the fact that they haven’t been photographed since the Nixon administration adds fuel to the conspiracy theory fires.
Overall, though, the LROC mission is not really about the past.

It will sample the Moon’s radiation environment, search for patches of frozen water, make laser maps of lunar terrain and, using LROC, photograph the Moon’s entire surface. By the time astronauts return, they’ll know the best places to land and much of what awaits them.


Two key targets: the moon’s poles. Why? Potential locations for moon bases, of course.
– posted by Dan Dupont

Share |

July 12th, 2005 | Space | 4810 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2005/07/12/moon-shine/Moon+shine2005-07-12+13%3A08%3A37dupont You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Camp Normal | Rapid fire 7/12/05 » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Fred Witzell says:
    July 12, 2005 at 2:51 pm

    M-O-O-N… That spells moon…

    Reply
  2. Scott Snyder says:
    July 15, 2005 at 8:32 am

    We have had the technology for a long time to accomplish ‘just about’ anything we wanted to do, within reason. I am extremely excited about the prospect of our manned return to the moon. The accusations made by a ‘cat rancher’ and his untrustworthy sidekick cannot be justified. Our exit from lunar exploration was a bit of a let down since the moon holds so much potential for us as a species. I will eagerly await the developements of this planned return as it progresses.

    Reply
  3. Bill Curtin Smrekar says:
    July 15, 2005 at 9:08 am

    This makes more sense than what seems to be useless trips to Mars. A purposeful trip to the moon, hmm.…intrigueing. Perhaps this time it won’t be in the name of a glorified rock hobby!

    Reply
  4. Gregg Mouritzen says:
    July 15, 2005 at 9:40 am

    We could have done this 30 years ago. It’s about time. We’ve got the space station next the moon base. After that who knows how far we can go. I’ve always dreamed of taking a trip to the moon. Soon it may be possible.

    Reply
  5. Jeff Gonzales says:
    July 15, 2005 at 12:46 pm

    Just to add fuel to the conspiracy fire…let’s say they do “photograph” old 1972 Apollo mission remnants. With today’s computer technology, it’s nothing a good Graphic Artist and Photoshop couldn’t come up with.
    Jeff

    Reply
  6. Ogre says:
    July 15, 2005 at 1:53 pm

    In 1961 we decided to send a man to the moon, and by 1969 it was done. In 2004 we want to send a man to the moon, and it won’t happen until 2020?!

    Reply
  7. Christine says:
    July 15, 2005 at 6:44 pm

    Let’s see here, It’s July 2005, at the time I read this. I am glad I heard of it because I want to man this mission. I have always dreamed of going to the moon or far out in space. It seems far fetched to average day people. Yet to people like me who actually accomplish their dreams, it sounds pretty tangible! Now I have something to look forward to, in my career with NASA. For now I am just va determined Full time college student. But in the near future, perspectively by NASA’s time frame… You’ll see my name in headlines, “Christine Sifuentes”. Call me ridiculous or a dreamer, I just call it long term planning! I totally agree with this mission, because it seems like in extraordinary opportunity for America to flourish, especially during these times! I feel like I was made to have pride for the USA. I like to say I was BORN INTO THR NAVY, my Dad was an enlisted sailor since 4 years before I was born, and he’s still in! I may have never been active duty or in ROTC, but I have lived a military life day in and day out. I know how it works, and I am currently heading for a masters or PHD, and anticipating my full fledged space jump suit! I think everyone should support this AWESOME inquiry NASA’s doing for not only America, but for history of the World!
    Sincerely,
    Christine Sifuentes

    Reply
  8. Bob Greene says:
    July 15, 2005 at 10:40 pm

    This is enough to make me want to buy Alpha Centauri (a space colonization strategy game)!
    As any soldier can tell you, after the food concerns are fixed, communications should be high priority to counteract the social issues that will need addressed. People tend to act a bit strangely when left by themsleves too much. E-mail & video conferencing will keep morale high. After all, we all need to stay in touch w/ family.
    It would be interesting to see if ruggedized greenhouses would work on the moon.
    Clearly the areas most often in sunlight should be reserved for solar collectors for energy gathering, then storage. Habitation structures can radiate around this portion of the moon.
    If it’s cold enough, refrigeration shouldn’t be as much as an issue as long as high sanitation standards are followed. Sounds like the chlorine bleach & other cleaning supply manufacturers will have an additional market opening up!
    On that topic, we can use the same principles of heat pump/cooling systems for climate control.
    It may be best to have diverse endeavors to diminish security concerns in habitation structures. Or, maybe some enterprising companies can set up security contracts, as long as they are clearly neutral. So, once again, we have to show diversity.
    Every nation involved should realize that it is in everyone’s best interest to fully cooperate to simply survive together there.

    Reply
  9. Mart says:
    August 9, 2007 at 8:37 pm

    Let’s just face it…
    We all got conned by NASA.
    If we want to send people through the radiation belts outside our planet they’ll be fried in a matter of a minute due to extreme radiation.
    Even with todays technology astronauts will not be able to survive this radiation in a space shuttle or a capsule in which they claimed to have used in 1969..which was only a mm thick aluminum plate.…come on, who are they trying to fool?
    And what if they did pull it off,..suppose…
    Why than, did we never turn back again.
    If it was all real events,..shouldn’t we have had a daily ‘airline’ hopping up and down with passengers by now?
    Noooo, maybe just maybe they’ll manage to come up with an idea to get people to the moon in 2020..
    Hold on…wait a minute..
    How did they do it in 1969 than?
    With all them primitive computers and unstable rockets…something smells fishy wouldn’t y’all think?
    And still people believe this shit?
    Wake up.
    It’s a lie,..and very big lie..
    And NASA has a problem indeed.
    Once you told a huge lie to the world… you can’t ‘de-lie’it anymore.
    I think it’s a joke…and people who still believe in it…O well…dream on people.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
    • And, the Vertical Landing
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
    • JFCOM’s JOE Whacks Defense Industry
    • New F-35B Hover Video
    • China’s Shipbuilding in a Regional Context
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
    • Petraeus to SASC Today; Israel-Palestine to Come Up? (Updated)
    Recent Comments
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      I think the approach would be a two-fold benefit for...
      ed!
    • Was the Gates Counter-USAF Sortie Fair?
      criticism of f-22 : http://www.google.com/searc...
      google
    • Was the Gates Counter-USAF Sortie Fair?
      f-22 articles with comments and replies :...
      freepublic
    • Was the Gates Counter-USAF Sortie Fair?
      criticism of f-22 :...
      criticism of f-22
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
      "The US retired the ideal littoral combat...
      Matthew S.
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
      Lockheed did put out the Surface Combat...
      Camp
    • And, the Vertical Landing
      That's an awesome deal! Did not realize that Lockheed...
      Sarcasmotron
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
      So let's get off out fat butts...
      Ranger-12
    • Petraeus to SASC Today; Israel-Palestine to Come Up? (Updated)
      Does petraeus think he is...
      landouzy
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
      The General Dynamics LCS was...
      Dark_Sentry
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage