Glad to hear Obama wants to send men to mars by 2030 but...what happened to the moon?

[catamaranman]

In February President Obama proposed a dramatic new path that would end NASA's Constellation moon program and shift the agency's focus to developing new technologies for deeper space exploration instead. I couldn't easily find an earlier thread (surprisingly) so here it is: I'd like to hear some of the OF'ers sound off on this very pertinent topic!

 

[IronRain]

There is a thread where this is discussed: NASA's Future: The War Continues

 

[jinglesassy]

Long story short:
We have been there so why go back?

 

[OrbiterSpore]

Long story short:
We have been there so why go back?

:ditto: he is right. i really liked to walk at the moon, but prices never help. BTW, we already were there.
(SO MARZ IZ DAH NAW ROPE!:lol

 

[SiberianTiger]

Long story short:
We have been there so why go back?

Long answer short: they were not "we" or "you" there, they were "them", the generation of people whom "we" can't match in our deeds. So for America, it's not a space race against the Soviets this time, but rather against their own grandfathers.

 

[RisingFury]

Long story short:
We have been there so why go back?

15th century Europeans say: "We've already been to the New World, why go back there again?"

Yep! Makes perfect sense!

 

[garyw]

Long story short:
We have been there so why go back?

That's like saying "I've visited every country on Earth" by walking out of your front door.

How many lunar discoveries have been made since Gene Cernan left the surface?

You cannot say that the moon has not been explored. Now, as for a reason to go back here are a couple of ideas:

• A radio telescope on the far side. A that rock between the telescope and Earth gives it the perfect opportunity for observation.
  
• Collection of He3.
  
• Staging point for launches beyond the Earth Moon System.
  
• Lunar mining for H20 to be ferried to an orbital fuel fort.
  
• Equipment tests for Mars
  
• Experience of living in a low gee environment

and more....

 

[OrbiterSpore]

lol i didn't saw like that...

 

[IronRain]

That's like saying "I've visited every country on Earth" by walking out of your front door.

How many lunar discoveries have been made since Gene Cernan left the surface?

You cannot say that the moon has not been explored. Now, as for a reason to go back here are a couple of ideas:

• A radio telescope on the far side. A that rock between the telescope and Earth gives it the perfect opportunity for observation.
• Collection of He3.
• Staging point for launches beyond the Earth Moon System.
• Lunar mining for H20 to be ferried to an orbital fuel fort.
• Equipment tests for Mars
• Experience of living in a low gee environment

and more....

Thanks,

But why don't want to go back to the moon? Is money the real problem? I mean, it's more expensive to go to Mars I guess. Maybe I just think too simple, I know.

 

[garyw]

There are three problems:

Technical
Going to the moon isn't easy. Just because we have done it doesn't mean that the next time around will be easier. Also, equipment for Mars has to be developed and tested as does equipment for the moon. It's a long process.

Monetary
To go to the Moon and Mars is expensive, it's actually not hugely expensive but still expensive enough that people who make the budget take note. Add this cost the existing costs of ISS maintenance, Soyuz flights, Commercial space flight and science programmes and you get a figure around $24Bilion. Enough to really get peoples attention especially in this age of cost cutting. This is also one of the few programmes that can be cut because it's not required. Ask yourself this - Why do we need to go to the moon? We don't hence it can be delayed or dropped.

Political
I don't think that there is anyone in the US government who cares about spaceflight. What they care about is keeping their positions and expense budgets and that means keeping people reasonably happy - even if it isn't the right thing to (shuttle derived for example) so they will get voted in again.
The President is the worst. He has 4 years in office, maybe 8 if he is lucky. He won't be in office is 2030 so he doesn't want someone else to get the rewards for a programme he instigated. I don't think many Presidents take a long term view and spaceflight requires that view.

 

[Moach]

15th century Europeans say: "We've already been to the New World, why go back there again?"

Yep! Makes perfect sense!

except that there's no gold and other things to loot on the Moon....
quite a shame actually... we'd have whole cities there by now if there was :hmm:

aah, humans, when will they cease :facepalm:

 

[T.Neo]

A radio telescope on the far side. A that rock between the telescope and Earth gives it the perfect opportunity for observation.

It isn't as exciting as a flashy mission to Mars.

Collection of He3.

Which we don't have enough of a use for to be viable at the moment...

Staging point for launches beyond the Earth Moon System.

Complex, costly and potentially dangerous, unless you have a very developed cislunar economy.

Lunar mining for H20 to be ferried to an orbital fuel fort.

Also complex, costly and potentially dangerous...

Equipment tests for Mars

In an environment that only bears a passing resemblance to Mars...

Experience of living in a low gee environment

We really don't have any of this. We have thousands of years in 1 G, thousands of hours in microgravity, but nothing in between...

aah, humans, when will they cease

When they're shot and killed? :uhh:

 

[Rtyh-12]

After reading this thread, it seems that the best way to go to the moon is Orbiter...

 

[garyw]

It isn't as exciting as a flashy mission to Mars.

no, it's practical which is its downfall.

 

[Ghostrider]

We could try to land a manned mission on Burbank. I think technology has advanced enough that we can try to safely land a crew there, and bring them back safely (provided time on target is less than 5 minutes).

 

[T.Neo]

no, it's practical which is its downfall.

I can see plenty of practical reasons for a mission to Mars.

I'm not saying a radio telescope would not be practical, just that it would not be flashy. And of course it is not going to yield the same scientific returns as a Mars mission; it's going to give different ones.

Though I wonder about the effectiveness of a Lunar radio telescope as opposed to say, one at the lunar L2 point...

 

[RisingFury]

Now, as for a reason to go back here are a couple of ideas:

• A radio telescope on the far side. A that rock between the telescope and Earth gives it the perfect opportunity for observation.
• Collection of He3.
• Staging point for launches beyond the Earth Moon System.
• Lunar mining for H20 to be ferried to an orbital fuel fort.
• Equipment tests for Mars
• Experience of living in a low gee environment

Screw mining, do SCIENCE! A lot more science!

The Moon holds clues to the history of Earth and Moon and to the future of their evolution! Hell, given that Mercury might have suffered a similarly terrible event that deprived it of it's rocky mantle and left a dense planet, as well as Venus that now has a slow retrograde rotation, a possible sign of an impact.

 

[T.Neo]

So does Mars. Mars has some very, very interesting features related to it's previous hydrosphere. It's also sort of halfway between the Moon and Earth, which leads to interesting volcanic and possible tectonic events...

EDIT:

Oh, and it might have fossils or potentially even living specimens of life...

 

[N_Molson]

If we can go to Mars, we can go the Moon. Less gravity, no atmosphere, less Dv required.

Also Mars is a real planet, the Moon is "only" a natural satellite. That's another psychological step towards the stars where probably lies the future of the human race (provided humans begin to seriously care about their fate as a species, not as two hundred of warmongering countries)

 

[orbitingpluto]

Mars is talked about more because it has a 'First Man' situation. Going to the Moon to get headlines means doing science, and there is a indifferent feeling towards science in general. Look at the idiots who are taking about dismantling the ISS now that it can do the orbital workshop stuff that it was built to do. If there isn't a way to get something quick no one would do it. Even the Apollo missions got underfunded, with the idea that it was all just go to the Moon and that was it. I wonder what would have happened if Kennedy didn't die and Apollo became something like Constellation or Space Station Freedom. Would America even gotten to the Moon had not one Presidents words became a legacy?