http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/ The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security Fri, 25 May 2012 23:53:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177217 surya narayan singh Fri, 03 Oct 2008 14:15:28 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177217 India India

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177216 cc Wed, 21 May 2008 02:21:14 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177216 Going to the moon could be useful in panning out the technologies needed to have a manned mission to Mars wherein the astronauts have to survive on the resources brought with them and the material on the moon. It's a safer situation than testing those technologies on Mars when any assistance is over a year away, as opposed to the moon being days away. It's a simple fact that the US thinks it owns the moon and especially this president to take any competition from another country as a 'threat' there. Monitoring other countries activities on the moon as well as securing the 'good ground' for ourselves is also a priority I would imagine. The shuttle was not designed to 'get people into orbit' it was made to launch satellites as well as be capable of landing in a more controlled and reliable manner than capsules. As far as a group mission to mars or anywhere else it's a laudable goal but look at the all the trouble we've had with our ISS. We've had to pay for the Russians contribution and had delay after delay, not to mention how it was scaled back. Countries cannot work well enough together to support and implement a manned mission or join space flight programs. I'd like to see a real space station capable of supporting itself with minimal if any resupply, a self sustaining moon base, and of course a new space vehicle before a mars mission. 'abba' has it right, we take these steps to push out but don't follow through or end up with something that's basically worthless once our short sighted goal is accomplished. Going to the moon could be useful in panning out the technologies needed to have a manned mission to Mars wherein the astronauts have to survive on the resources brought with them and the material on the moon. It’s a safer situation than testing those technologies on Mars when any assistance is over a year away, as opposed to the moon being days away.
It’s a simple fact that the US thinks it owns the moon and especially this president to take any competition from another country as a ‘threat’ there. Monitoring other countries activities on the moon as well as securing the ‘good ground’ for ourselves is also a priority I would imagine.
The shuttle was not designed to ‘get people into orbit’ it was made to launch satellites as well as be capable of landing in a more controlled and reliable manner than capsules.
As far as a group mission to mars or anywhere else it’s a laudable goal but look at the all the trouble we’ve had with our ISS. We’ve had to pay for the Russians contribution and had delay after delay, not to mention how it was scaled back. Countries cannot work well enough together to support and implement a manned mission or join space flight programs.
I’d like to see a real space station capable of supporting itself with minimal if any resupply, a self sustaining moon base, and of course a new space vehicle before a mars mission.
’abba’ has it right, we take these steps to push out but don’t follow through or end up with something that’s basically worthless once our short sighted goal is accomplished.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177215 cc Wed, 21 May 2008 02:20:14 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177215 Going to the moon could be useful in panning out the technologies needed to have a manned mission to Mars wherein the astronauts have to survive on the resources brought with them and the material on the moon. It's a safer situation than testing those technologies on Mars when any assistance is over a year away, as opposed to the moon being days away. It's a simple fact that the US thinks it owns the moon and especially this president to take any competition from another country as a 'threat' there. Monitoring other countries activities on the moon as well as securing the 'good ground' for ourselves is also a priority I would imagine. The shuttle was not designed to 'get people into orbit' it was made to launch satellites as well as be capable of landing in a more controlled and reliable manner than capsules. As far as a group mission to mars or anywhere else it's a laudable goal but look at the all the trouble we've had with our ISS. We've had to pay for the Russians contribution and had delay after delay, not to mention how it was scaled back. Countries cannot work well enough together to support and implement a manned mission or join space flight programs. I'd like to see a real space station capable of supporting itself with minimal if any resupply, a self sustaining moon base, and of course a new space vehicle before a mars mission. 'abba' has it right, we take these steps to push out but don't follow through or end up with something that's basically worthless once our short sighted goal is accomplished. Going to the moon could be useful in panning out the technologies needed to have a manned mission to Mars wherein the astronauts have to survive on the resources brought with them and the material on the moon. It’s a safer situation than testing those technologies on Mars when any assistance is over a year away, as opposed to the moon being days away.
It’s a simple fact that the US thinks it owns the moon and especially this president to take any competition from another country as a ‘threat’ there. Monitoring other countries activities on the moon as well as securing the ‘good ground’ for ourselves is also a priority I would imagine.
The shuttle was not designed to ‘get people into orbit’ it was made to launch satellites as well as be capable of landing in a more controlled and reliable manner than capsules.
As far as a group mission to mars or anywhere else it’s a laudable goal but look at the all the trouble we’ve had with our ISS. We’ve had to pay for the Russians contribution and had delay after delay, not to mention how it was scaled back. Countries cannot work well enough together to support and implement a manned mission or join space flight programs.
I’d like to see a real space station capable of supporting itself with minimal if any resupply, a self sustaining moon base, and of course a new space vehicle before a mars mission.
’abba’ has it right, we take these steps to push out but don’t follow through or end up with something that’s basically worthless once our short sighted goal is accomplished.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177214 GNU Linux Tue, 06 May 2008 05:07:00 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177214 I am 40 years old. When I was a little kid, I felt completely obsessed with the moon missions. I remember a guy from NASA said that the future space shuttles would build the space station that would build to space ship to take us to Mars. Although I hope that we can use He3 from the moon for nuclear fission, I just want us to go to Mars before I die. I would feel great pride from seeing a few flags planted on Mars. Who cares about the science benefits? Just to say that we went to Mars would be good enough for me. I am 40 years old. When I was a little kid, I felt completely obsessed with the moon missions. I remember a guy from NASA said that the future space shuttles would build the space station that would build to space ship to take us to Mars. Although I hope that we can use He3 from the moon for nuclear fission, I just want us to go to Mars before I die. I would feel great pride from seeing a few flags planted on Mars. Who cares about the science benefits? Just to say that we went to Mars would be good enough for me.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-72173 stephen russell Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:32:20 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-72173 Use Moon as steppingstone to Mars & have He3 from Moon be a new Energy Industry base. More Pvt sector jobs on the Moon & link to Space Solar Power arrays too. More jobs Win Win. & use Moon to deter incoming asteroids. Launch missiles or use Mega ray guns to deflect asteroids. Use Moon as steppingstone to Mars & have He3 from Moon be a new Energy Industry base.
More Pvt sector jobs on the Moon & link to Space Solar Power arrays too.
More jobs
Win Win.
& use Moon to deter incoming asteroids.
Launch missiles or use Mega ray guns to deflect asteroids.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177213 Gusto Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:40:54 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177213 The moon would be a perfect research ground for further exploration. I don't understand why we aren't on it right now. It is a sad thing America have money to go to war but doesn't to set a worldwide goal. China, USA, Japan, Europe should all work together for it. One country isn't enough for this task. We won't be able to get to Mars if we don't have less gravity pull. It is just way to costly/heavy. If we can produce propellant on Moon (helium-3 or methane) it would help a lot to get to Mars. Get us back there and stop the war! The moon would be a perfect research ground for further exploration. I don’t understand why we aren’t on it right now. It is a sad thing America have money to go to war but doesn’t to set a worldwide goal. China, USA, Japan, Europe should all work together for it. One country isn’t enough for this task.
We won’t be able to get to Mars if we don’t have less gravity pull. It is just way to costly/heavy. If we can produce propellant on Moon (helium-3 or methane) it would help a lot to get to Mars.
Get us back there and stop the war!

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177212 buckwheat Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:22:09 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177212 I think We should start sending deep diggers and tunnel boring machines that have autonomous and remote control capability to the moon. That way could can start building underground structures from the confines of earth. There are many benefits for it to be underground. I'm very confident engineers have the capability to make this a reality with our current technology and capital. We could have partners such as Britain, Canada, Japan, Germany, France, Austraila etc Investing in such a project. This should have been done years ago. The moon would be a perfect training model on how to colonize other planet because of it's proximity and practicality and safety reasons. Projects such as mining and moon tourism will also spur more capital which could be incorporated to fund other future planetary mission. I just don't see what benefits landing on an asteriod would do as opposed to landing and colonizing the moon. This would just be a waste of money. You think small you get small results, you think big you get big results. I think We should start sending deep diggers and tunnel boring machines that have autonomous and remote control capability to the moon. That way could can start building underground structures from the confines of earth. There are many benefits for it to be underground. I’m very confident engineers have the capability to make this a reality with our current technology and capital. We could have partners such as Britain, Canada, Japan, Germany, France, Austraila etc Investing in such a project. This should have been done years ago. The moon would be a perfect training model on how to colonize other planet because of it’s proximity and practicality and safety reasons. Projects such as mining and moon tourism will also spur more capital which could be incorporated to fund other future planetary mission. I just don’t see what benefits landing on an asteriod would do as opposed to landing and colonizing the moon. This would just be a waste of money. You think small you get small results, you think big you get big results.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177211 Christian Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:07:45 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177211 Bryan2020 Sorry dude, I had to remove that YouTube link because it was too long and messed up the formatting for the blog. Not sure, but I think when we upgrade to the latest version of Movable Type, that kind of thing will be fixed. Bryan2020
Sorry dude, I had to remove that YouTube link because it was too long and messed up the formatting for the blog. Not sure, but I think when we upgrade to the latest version of Movable Type, that kind of thing will be fixed.

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177210 abba Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:39:20 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177210 Dr. Friedman and company are focusing a little too much on the exploration aspects of space. Going the Mars Direct route will put us in the same state after Apollo, after Skylab, immediately after the construction of the shuttle, a major lead that gets pissed away. I would say most involve know the absurdity of the orbital mechanics behind a moon to Mars mission, but the reason why they keep silent about it is because the real goal is to establish a permanent base on the moon. Yes, it would be preferable to find water-ice on the moon's surface, but it isn't the killing blow the Planetary Society thinks it is. I know this is linking to their opponents at this point, but here is some information about extracting hydrogen and oxygen from the Lunar environment. http://www.asi.org/adb/02/02/regolith-volatiles.html Dr. Friedman and company are focusing a little too much on the exploration aspects of space. Going the Mars Direct route will put us in the same state after Apollo, after Skylab, immediately after the construction of the shuttle, a major lead that gets pissed away.
I would say most involve know the absurdity of the orbital mechanics behind a moon to Mars mission, but the reason why they keep silent about it is because the real goal is to establish a permanent base on the moon. Yes, it would be preferable to find water-ice on the moon’s surface, but it isn’t the killing blow the Planetary Society thinks it is.
I know this is linking to their opponents at this point, but here is some information about extracting hydrogen and oxygen from the Lunar environment. http://www.asi.org/adb/02/02/regolith-volatiles.html

]]> http://defensetech.org/2008/03/13/nasa-moon-mission-in-jeopardy/#comment-177209 dvd Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:35:15 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3895#comment-177209 Or....better yet, the benefits of liberty of mind could be enhanced by private enterprise taking over. Goal setting of any missions would be determined by an aglomeration of interests, whose purposes could be very diverse and lead to expanding technical scientific potential. What is the economic benefit of the moon or mars? Jobs for terra firma. Competition for sub contractor solutions inspires growth, competition would overcome inertia of political interests. Development and advancement of the case for human involvement in galactic enterprise. Encourages genius, identifies practical considerations for tradeing up our limitations. Advances alternatives to overcome systemic largess. Discovery happens in the eyes of the explorers, as much as it is in the motive of the mission. Encouraging new mission objectives can best come from observations not tied to limitation of narrow systemic hegemony. Makes more sense to me. Or.…better yet, the benefits of liberty of mind could be enhanced by private enterprise taking over. Goal setting of any missions would be determined by an aglomeration of interests, whose purposes could be very diverse and lead to expanding technical scientific potential.
What is the economic benefit of the moon or mars?
Jobs for terra firma. Competition for sub contractor solutions inspires growth, competition would overcome inertia of political interests. Development and advancement of the case for human involvement in galactic enterprise. Encourages genius, identifies practical considerations for tradeing up our limitations. Advances alternatives to overcome systemic largess. Discovery happens in the eyes of the explorers, as much as it is in the motive of the mission. Encouraging new mission objectives can best come from observations not tied to limitation of narrow systemic hegemony. Makes more sense to me.

]]>