Sign in to follow this  
Guest beana51

Should we go back to the moon?

Recommended Posts

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!I thought this debate happened before my time, but here we go again. The Cold war was a driving force last time, but...I honestly don't see the point in manned missions beyond low or geosynchronous orbit. All the reasons given seem more like reasons to explore the Pacific basin. Energy? Frozen methane seeps- Though it is a greenhouse gas. Mining the moon? Didn't it come from the Pacific basin? There are literally fountains near the Marianas trench spewing titanium, gold et cetera and the only ones I know doing something about it are the North Koreans. They were there years ago with a ship vaccuming up the cooled nuggets of various elemements. Technological innovations? Air and water purification could benefit just as much by extreme duration submersions. We can move millions of tons of equipment to the Marianas cheaper than we could send a crew to the moon once. Yes there are enormous challenges, but the benefits to hassle ratio seems drastically in favor of Oceanic rather than space manned exploration missions. Men DO have their place in space now, but not on the moon or Mars IMHO.It is entirely possible within the laws of physics to build an elevator to geosynchronous orbit. The missing elememt is the maturity of "supercarbon" filements to provide the strength to weight ratio for the cables. In the 80s they were saying it would take a hundred years. The devs of ENIAC probably probably thought at least twice that long before a calculator would fit on your wrist.Yes, as long as man exists he will explore and that is a good thing. But taxpayer's dollars would IMO be better spent exploring, understanding, protecting and getting resources from the ocean rather than space.No, let's not forget space. But till there's an elevator, let future missions out of orbit be exclusively unmanned.Opinions?Best Regards, Donny:-wave

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

We should colonise space in preparation for leaving the solar system, if a mission to the moon is a stepping stone to achieve that I'm all for it.If it's another Apollo program, just a show of technological achievement, it's a waste of money better spent on the real target.We can't remain penned up on this overcrowded planet forever. Abandoning manned spaceflight will mean a death warrant for the human race within a relatively short period. It might be a few centuries, maybe a thousand years, but by then we'll be so overcrowded and completely out of resources that we can't survive any longer without colonising space but by then we'd lack the resources to pull it off and die out.Your reasoning is therefore false. Using the ocean floor will only delay the inevitable if we don't open up space in a grand fashion as well.The ocean floor may keep us in minerals and living space for another few hundred years at best, space will keep us supplied and able to expand practically forever.We should indeed NOT focus on planetary exploration and colonisation as that's decidedly uneconomical. I see planets as little more than tourist attractions in the future of the human race. Maybe a few gas giants may be able to supply fuel for spacecraft through automated factories, maybe a few minerals that exist only on planetary surfaces might need to be mined there, but that's the extent of our need for them.Building space settlements for tens of thousands of people if not larger is no problem. It was technically feasible back in the 1970s but at the time considered politically unnecessary (it takes longer than the next elections) and too expensive (because they wanted to pull all the materials up from the earth instead of mining them from asteroids).In the near future we could hollow out large asteroids and move them into high stable orbits (or even free in orbits around the sun). The materials mined can be used to build the internal structure of the settlement and the remainder to pay off the debt of building it and make a nice profit as well.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Donny, Yes, of course we should.The JFK speech many years ago opened the window in that direction.It was the forfilment of many a dream.It was then the greatest thing I ever heard.Proven, was we could if we want to.I think as surly as man left the cave,and went over the mountain,"WE", man, will have to go and explore whats over our mountain.Space that is.I know the arguments for, robotic exploration should suffice.And it can,but for pure exploration,with the human ability to absorb what is happening, that should never be substitute. A debate like this can go on, and on, like it has for too long.Just very recently the Chinese have expressed serous interest in space. The only vacuum out there is the one we created by not pursuing further exploration.Whats over there?,its mans eternal question. Ever since our common ancestors left Africa,man has explored every part of his environment. A long time ago? some may ask,no,it was just yesterday. Geologically that is.This Ole Earth,home ,may break down,and can't get fixed,or the sun may belch,and Barbecue the place,or one of those rocks may hit a bullseye, us, or like some ancient bus,it can't go NO-MO.Is life and intelligence supposed to sit on a dusty road,with a busted bus,no place to go, and get extinct.? "Will we be the "Right stuff?" or no stuff at all. I hope not. VIN :-spacecraft

Share this post


Link to post

Lol....that smiley inventory is a lot deeper than I realized.Couldn

Share this post


Link to post

And never forget that when the moon project was stopped the technology was lost.At the moment we don't know how to build a Saturn V rocket, let alone something with similar power based on current level technology.All the blueprints, rigs, computer data, everything was DESTROYED on orders from on high (like white house high) to prevent the project from ever being reactivated.

Share this post


Link to post

>All the blueprints, rigs, computer data, everything was>DESTROYED on orders from on high (like white house high) to>prevent the project from ever being reactivated.I can't remember ever reading a credible accounting of such an order. Lots was lost, true, but I think due to the careless lack of archiving after the program ended. There are two Saturn launch vehicles from the Apollo program still in existence...one would think that if such an order were given it'd be a glaring omission to leave two completed rockets laying around...Time to head back to www.crazyconspiracytheories.com for some new material I think.:-zhelp :-abductCheerioBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post

>And never forget that when the moon project was stopped the>technology was lost.>At the moment we don't know how to build a Saturn V rocket,>let alone something with similar power based on current level>technology.>>All the blueprints, rigs, computer data, everything was>DESTROYED on orders from on high (like white house high) to>prevent the project from ever being reactivated.Uhhhhh....where do you get this stuff? I have no knowledge of this and can

Share this post


Link to post

Hi all. The US space program is currently grounded due to a number of reasons. First and formost is the general public apathy. Some attitudes are "Go to the moon? We did that already." Secondly, our information services have more important things to focus on. Subsequent space information has been delegated the the back columns.Thirdly and most importantly is of course, money. We as a Nation have financed all for the world and nation's benefit, find there is not enough money. I'm also afraid that in the universities the questions are not being asked. Where are the dreams and urgency of the young? Where are the people going to come from when we need them? Of course we have talented, capable individuals but not yet motivated. Space travel is the natural extension of our destiny. I never realized that the wiring in the early capsules had to be done by, for the most part, elderly women, who after years of making dollies, clothes, etc, had the patience to do this work. They along with all the other pioneers in space are gone. Give us an APOLLO 13 story, we get interested. Show us the price we have paid in a space tragedy, it holds our attention, but everyday success bores us. A batting average of a ballplayer who is making millions is far more important.(Even to me times.)Yet something will happen to get us with the program again. This Rip Van Winkle slumber can't last forever. The talent will be energized by the dream again. I believe that. As I suggested, man, representing mankind will have to start thinking of evolution to the stars. It's the way to go. Then again there may not be an alternative. The thought of some alien anthropologist trying to figure out who we were is not the stuff of science fiction. We do it all the time. Thanks, VIN

Share this post


Link to post

Those two are missing a lot of parts which were canabilised for other vehicles (especially the Apollo-Soyuz and Skylab missions).It's what I heard from several sources, could indeed have been negligence covered up by a story of orders from up high.It happened 30 years ago, there's not likely to be a paper trail leading anywhere by now.What is known is that NASA shelved pretty much everything they had to finance the Shuttle, maybe that's where the story originates.

Share this post


Link to post

FTL is indeed unlikely.Near lightspeed can be reached but the required accelleration to do so quickly isn't feasible using current (or currently envisioned) technology.That's why any interstellar manned spacecraft would essentially have to be a generation ship with a population large enough to have a stable genetic makeup so they can survive for hundreds of years until 3 or 4 generations later the ship arrives at its destination.Such trips would of course almost have to be one-way, with the established colonies possibly building new ships to continue the expansion when they arrive.To our current mindset this may seem weird, even unacceptable to many, but it's little different from the sailors who set out to colonise the Americas and Australia. For them too there was no real way back, and they were travelling into the unknown.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Donny,Good subject.Yes, we should go back to the moon as one mission to my knowledge was observed by 'UFO's parked on the top of a ridge looking down on the Astronauts and watching their progress.This to any other lifeform would be neutral territory for a meeting with extra terrestials and could form a basis for new technology that would benefit all of us?Observations viewed on Earth puts the human race as a very hostile species, the moon with it's limitations is the perfect ground for contact (Assuming it hasn't happened yet and not made public?).Dave T. .........On the lovely warm Devon Riviera and active 'FlightSim User's Group' member at http://www.flightsimgrpuk.free-online.co.uk/

Share this post


Link to post

I think these thoughts expressed here remind me of the parable of the blind men trying to describe an elephant. Its a tree trunk!,says one, no ,its a serpent! replies another, I got it,its a fly swatter!.All may be correct. The ability to comprehend complex things also requires different points of view,and time,Evolution that is.Evolution of the human mind .Were still not very far from our closest relatives,the chimps.That only because a comet got rid of our reptilian ancestors. Each human generation breeds great minds and men.Those stone tool makers, cave painters were great minds and great artists,the early Greco/Roman input was was almost unsurpassed.The Renaissance took us kicking,stinking and dragging the mind from the dark ages.A Mr. Da Vinci a Mr. Galileo,,A Mr Newton, and more recently a Mr. Einstein.Of course the list goes on, and are milestones in human evolution of thinking.All may have shown that nothing is impossible,and with logic ,all should be pursued..Now at the currant accelerated rate of development,things we take for granted were not only considered impossible,yesterday,but were unimaginable.As surly ,as the belief by learned men that the earth was flat.I think all those great minds of the past would have no problem fitting into our world today.As surly as when an Aborigine is given a portable radio or a VCR,he adapts in a minute.The human mind can and will accept any technology almost instantly.The speed of light now is the yardstick of human,or for that matter ,celestial rates of movement and is its limiting speed.This stone wall of science is absolute.It is at least for now. But what if some other human mind,yet born, thinks not?Will we burn him as a heretic?The human mind is evolving at a fast,and an ever accelerating rate also. The last century shows that most dramatic development .From the horse buggy to the moon. Flight, breaking the sound barrier,the world of medicine and on and on. At this rate where will we be in the next century?Just a short time,in our story.I'm approaching 74 now.Seen a Lotta stuff happen in my short lifetime. Like what I'm doing rite now,Unmanageable! I've come a long way from a swivel chair,a broomstick,and making funny sounds tying to mimic a Radial engine,to this FS simulator. Which has evolved so quickly in a short time.Where will it take us at this rate of development??What we can not even dream of today will be reality tomorrow.But theres a dark side also.War ! Funny, some of our greatest innovations have been developed in those periods. But now,it could send us back,irreversibly to some intellectual stone age .Some think just that,intergalactic wars by other forms of life ,destroying themselves,leaving nothing. Civilizations reaching a zenith of development ,then vanishing in some fantastic destruction.This happening over,and over,and over again. Its a violent place out there,as witnessed by whats going on when we look at it.Unfriendly place.Some people refer to Aliens,Valid to be sure,but what if we are the top form of life,for now?,at least in our celestial neighborhood? We listen,we look,we call out,but to no avail,no one answers our calls! No requests to us by any Aliens to speak to our leaders? Supernovas,are not impartial as to what they eradicate.It may be we,sifting through some alien soil searching for life. THE STUFF OF DREAMS! VIN :-ufo2 (gotta go flying now)PS Friends, please spare us the abduction story's:-laugh1

Share this post


Link to post

There's a tiny problem with the speed of light and that's the energy needed to reach it.As long as your starting mass in larger than 0 it will always take an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light (unless everything we understand about physics is wrong).That makes it rather impossible to reach the speed of light, or get anywhere near it.

Share this post


Link to post

Its a big problem.I agree with you.The good Dr. said so with facts and figures.Too bad he is still not around,who knows what he further would have reveled to us. However you touched on something that may be valid .The stuff we know as of today. It may not apply to tomorrow.Thinking this could change with different minds.In the world of science,there has been many of misconceptions accepted as truth for a long time.Like the Earth being the center of the universe,or more recently the speed of sound being obsolute as the speed one can go.I tell ya, I tend not to take anything as not subject to change serous any longer.However ya can still count on death and taxes to forever remain constant, like the North Star. MMMMMM! I wonder about that OLE north star too!It may not be there at all?? Thanx for letting me Blaab on!! ITS FUN!! VIN :-laugh1

Share this post


Link to post

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!If such an order had been given, it would have been the ultra-comprehensive technical data and manufacturing tooling that would have been destroyed. This would have been done, if it was, to prevent other entities (enemies) from building their own. Remember Piper Aircraft ceased production of certain models when their tooling was lost in a flood? It's a major part of the expense of manufacturing.According to a reliable source, Kelly Johnson's successor at the Skunk Works, the order was given in regards to the SR-71. There are still some of those around too. But there won't be any more unless a program to develop it starts almost from scratch; considerably more difficult. "Reverse Engineering", well, you still have to figure out the tequniques and create the tooling.I don't know if the ability to make Saturn V components was deliberately destroyed. But it's a common practice for advanced aircraft with implications for National security that are retired, (No further need for spare parts on our part) and just cuz completed components were not destroyed doesn't mean the tooling and crucuial data collected while building them still exists.Best Regards, Donny:-wave

Share this post


Link to post

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!Wonder where you got the knoweledge, were you there?:-) Unmanned probes accomplish far more for less cost beyond orbit. We can practice living in space in orbit, and the things that only humans can do are more justified by the cost there.I never said the space program should be abandoned, in fact I said the opposite. But even in the atmosphere, caring for a human crew and passengers is a major expense in weight and cost.Yes, go on with a viable replacement for the Shuttle. But no matter how advanced, you are still going to have to accelerate a lot of weight thru a thick atmosphere to thousands of miles an hour to even think about going beyond orbit. Reusable technology is improving to get to orbit, a good first step. But once there's an elevator, a complete possibility according to the basic laws of physics, it will take far less energy to get to orbit. Then let the colonization begin. Till then space travel will be almost exclusively the domain of those who devote their entire lives to it and the affluent adventure tourist types. If colonization and pleasure trips come into play, corporations should be the driving force. And NASA should collaborate with them if they invent a better mousetrap.Imagine for a second if the U.S. Federal Government had been directing the colonization of the West? We'd have major cities close to the Missisipi and maybe outposts on the California coast.Best Regards, Donny:-)

Share this post


Link to post

The North Star will not be around forever, that's a well known fact.Even if the heavens weren't to change because of the shifting of the stars (due to simple stellar mechanics) that particular star will at some point burn out.Energy limits though are pretty constant.While I agree we may find ways to travel FTL, getting there will remain tricky. It would have to involve some hitherto unknown science allowing a craft to move from a speed at some point below c to another speed some point beyond c without passing through c (where c is of course the speed of light) and back again as the limits to accelleration would work in reverse at FTL speeds, requiring ever higher energy to decellerate towards c in direct relation to the energy needed to accellerate to c from below c.Some call this transition hyperspace, a concept that. though not theoretically impossible, is beyond the current range of scientific understanding.

Share this post


Link to post

You're still thinking only of exploration and of hauling every up through the earth's gravity well.That's not the way forward. The way forward is large colonies in space, taking care of mining and construction efforts at a system-wide scale (or at least as far out as the asteroid belt).These colonies could be spun for artificial gravity, so the main problem of living in space which is bone decomposition because of the lack of gravity would be eliminated (or at least greatly reduced, a lower bone mass might develop if colonies elect to generate less than 1 g of gravity).At that point space could provide energy aplenty for the earth from solar powerplants in orbit, the energy beamed down to receivers on the planet surface, finally eliminating altogether the need for fossile fuels and nuclear fission.They could also provide for all needs of minerals and other natural resources for the entire system, eliminating the need for mining and polluting industry on the planet surface.And they'd be able to take up the excess population of the planet, reducing population pressure on natural resources like food, water, and living space, thereby eliminating most all reasons for conflict on the planet.When they feel the system is getting too crowded, they can set sail for faraway stars, becoming our Noah's arc, safeguarding the future of the human race even if some catastrophe of massive scale affected the entire solar system, wiping it all out.I may think big, but I also think longterm. If we want to prevent the human race from becoming extinct we have to keep sending people into space and colonise the place, prepare to expand beyond the cradle that is this solar system with its familiar yellow/white star which has shone upon us for hundreds of generations.That event which destroys the system may be billions of years away, but if we stop now with the colonisation of space which is just beginning we're going to be penned up forever on the surface of this planet.We'll have lost the will and the ability to ever venture forth from the cradle, ensuring that the cradle will be our grave.We'll again be cowering in horror at the night sky overhead, fearing that which may come down out of it and take us all, just like our forefathers in the stone age were afraid of falling stars, thinking they were bad omens (racial memory from early MEEs?).Even if we're lucky and a cometary impact doesn't wipe us out, we'll soon run out of natural resources and be unable to get out there because there won't be anything left to build spaceships and their engines out of, nor anything to fuel them.And neither will there be people willing and able to pilot those ships to gather those resources needed to start a new space program from scratch, all the while wondering why their ancient ancestors chose to abandon space except for sending a few robots to bring back pictures from the other planets, pictures that did nothing except excite the press but didn't provide minerals and metals, didn't create living space and relieve polution.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi again,and again I can not disagree with you. I think of the unknown future, but,of course todays facts and rules must be adhered to ,until!! I'm not sure of the visual heavens we see now.Using that rate as the limit, then these lights we see,really may not be there any longer.If things are hundreds of millions of light years away?,and they are still hearing signals from the big bang? Thats when I realize I don't know nutting,and get disorentieted..Those thoughts are humbling!Others tell us these things.I respect them with much admiration.Sure they disagree as we do on these forums.But the answers do come out, if for now,only to be reconsidered latter.I still think we got a long way to go on that evolutionary trip.Its like giving my very smart dog a book about rabbits! That heavenly book of knowledge may be staring us right in our face,with all the intelligence we seek,but we can't recognize it,our currant senses are not up to the task.Just like that dog,I guess.But as we know there are many books! "DON'T WORRY, BE HAPPY" REGARDS VIN

Share this post


Link to post

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!Um, wouldn't it be a lot more feasible to go down for our energy? Methane seeps on the ocean floor or drill to a depth that water turns to steam, maybe an alochohol mix which can increase the efficiency of steam driven turbines. Maintenance would be a heck of a lot easier! And as I said, we know more about the surface of the moon than the Pacific basin it came from. So what makes you so sure we can't get resourses there? Or that going to the moon for them makes more sense?Let's not confuse the romantic lure of spaceflight and real answers to the challenges we face as a species. We should get out of here and trash another system? If we can't live in this ideal ecosystem... Even if we put solar power plants in orbit, we are still talking about orbit. My original point, again, was that I don't see the point- or benefit of sending men beyond it for a while.I am all for the colonization of space. But it ain't gonna happen as long as it takes so much fuel to get to orbit. So we can practice in space stations and maintenance of systems to benefit mankind (like being able to watch Survivor around the world;( ) it will not be that long in human terms before there is an elevator that gets stuff and people to orbit at a cost ratio that rivals airline travel in the long run. Soon as "supercarbon" filaments come of age, which are being actively sought after by the building industry.Best Regards, Donny:-wave

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Donny, Like I indicated before ,all here are correct.All the thoughts are clear,and well spoken. Its nice to get into the mechanics of this subject. Often in doing so, the much bigger picture gets a bit blurry.In this case the mission,or the real goal.What is our goal?Is it to explore?,Is it to search for resources?Are we looking just for today,or next week,or even for next year?Are we thinking this like "THIS OLE HOUSE"?Lets fix it,its cheaper.Regarding the direction of the human race.If we were guarantied an unchanging celestial environment,well, then we can pause.Indulge in the luxury of travel,manage our ever growing population,food,disease, no problem,a kinda of Soylent Green thing.But its not ,nor was it ever.The universe is huge,we live in the milky way,a neighborhood in the suburbs of the Galaxy,We are spinning,the Galaxy is spinning,more than grains of sand on all the beaches on earth,they tell us are the number of Galaxy's out there.All,moving out and away from each other.Our life experience may be unique,I think not.I believe life is all over the universe.Extinction can happen in a wink,and no one will ever know the human race even existed,like that tree in the deep forest,when it falls who hears it?...And it may be this little ship Earth needs some life boats.Our history being,culture has to have the ability to continue and be a living,growing, thing.Not talking mass migration here, but rather a representation of our genes,chromosomes,the stuff of life,to be saved as a seeds for future life,somewhere. The human form of life must survive.I get carried away here,I must apologize all.Man looks for immortality.However we are subject to the yet unknown laws of the universe.For many,and rightly so the answers are clear.Evolution has brought us from those furry creatures doging the dinosaur's ponderous-feet ,our ancestors, to where we are now.It was not that Long ago,even the Neanderthal people were around longer than we have been to date.They did not make it.Its still going on,how we continue to evolve depends on our survival and longevity as a species.If its here on earth ,fine,if it has to be some other place?,well ,I hope we will be ready. Regards Donny! VIN :-laugh1

Share this post


Link to post

>Donny AKA Shalomar>Fly 2 ROCKS!!!>>Um, wouldn't it be a lot more feasible to go down for our>energy? Methane seeps on the ocean floor or drill to a depth>that water turns to steam, maybe an alochohol mix which canShort term, maybe. Long term, certainly not.It seeps up, but it's a finite supply.>increase the efficiency of steam driven turbines. Maintenance>would be a heck of a lot easier! And as I said, we know moreOnce you're established up there maintenance is a breeze. Certainly a lot easier 200 miles up than even half a mile down.Just look at the incredible lengths oil companies have to go to to do maintenance and repair work on drilling rigs even in a mere 100 meters of water...>from. So what makes you so sure we can't get resourses there?We can get resources there, but they'll run out and will likely end up costing more resources to extract than we pull up.>Or that going to the moon for them makes more sense?>The moon as I said doesn't make sense, we should bypass any rock with a noticable gravity well (meaning more than a tenth of a g or so).>Let's not confuse the romantic lure of spaceflight and real>answers to the challenges we face as a species. We should get>out of here and trash another system? If we can't live in this>ideal ecosystem... >Nothing romantic, just practical.>Even if we put solar power plants in orbit, we are still>talking about orbit. My original point, again, was that I>don't see the point- or benefit of sending men beyond it for a>while.>If we give up sending people now we'll forever remember we abandoned space because we were afraid of going up there.And yes, that will be the reason. The Apollo crews accepted that they had a risk of being blown to bits sitting on their big piles of explosives they called rockets.Today we cancel a launch if there's a disagreement between 2 of the 5 or more computers about a parameter even if that parameter according to all of them is well within safe margins. We're so afraid of taking risks that we're indeed cowering in our caves and shaking angry fists at the thundergods.>I am all for the colonization of space. But it ain't gonna>happen as long as it takes so much fuel to get to orbit. So weIt will never take less fuel to get up there, which is why we should make sure that we can remain there indefinitely and not have to return to earth to get supplies every week or so.>world;( ) it will not be that long in human terms before there>is an elevator that gets stuff and people to orbit at a costIf we abandon spacetravel, that elevator will never be built as there will be no need to.A few satelites every year can be put up by rockets, but will not be put up by a space elevator.Only if there's a booming economy up there will there be economic incentives to undertake a long and expensive construction cycle for such a mechanism.And that requires people who live up there, have kids there who want to see the planet from down there, and people down here who want to go to a luxury resort up there.It will require trade between people living up and people living down, a need to transport goods between orbit and surface at a rate higher than the occasional replacement Inmarsat or GPS bird.>ratio that rivals airline travel in the long run. Soon asIf we'd abandoned civilian airtravel in the 1920s because it was too risky and expensive with an attitude "let's wait until it gets cheaper and then try again" it would never have gotten cheaper.In fact today there'd be only a bit of military air traffic and maybe some high value cargo going by air and that would be it.Your analogy instead completely contradicts your own statements...

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this