The President's new plans on going back to the moon... - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Viking1064 · 01-10-2004, 05:35 AM

I love space and astronomy. I was born in 1964 and remember all the landings on the moon. It was fasinating tome. I would have to have all the facts before I decide, but I'd like to kow what kind of testing they would do on the moon that could not be done int he space station? Look how many trips it took to build MIR. How many trips will it take to set up a station on the moon?

Fire · 01-10-2004, 06:38 AM

yes- as i am fond of saying, the world belongs to the bold.....

yodapaul · 01-10-2004, 02:02 PM

I like the whole Idea, besides who says that the US Government has to pay for the trip or the base on the moon? Why can't some business fork over part of the money needed to help establish a station on the moon?

Did You know that the hotel industry has commistioned a study on what a Moon Resort would cost to build? And wheather it would make money or not? Business thinks about space and the moon more than people relize. The only thing holding space travel back is the cost per pound to put something into space. Figure out a way to lower the cost and you will have single handedly made space a lot more attractive for business. Once business gets interested it's only a matter of time before space travel will become akin to traveling on a airplane.

So really the only thing that the government has to do is lower the cost of getting into space. After that it becomes a snowball effect.

Just my humble opinion.

fik · 01-10-2004, 02:07 PM

Hey, We are already in debt 7 trillion bucks, whats a couple billion to go to the moon gonna hurt?

anleja · 01-10-2004, 08:24 PM

I suggest using the moon for our landfill overflow.

papermachesatan · 01-11-2004, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fik
Hey, We are already in debt 7 trillion bucks, whats a couple billion to go to the moon gonna hurt?

Development of the space program is a worthy investment in our children's future.

Nhanced1 · 01-11-2004, 12:54 AM

Inspiring our young people to go into careers in science and technology is an investment that is more than worthwhile. Children who watched the moon landing broadcast grew up to lead us into the information age, who knows what today's young people could do if given the proper inspiration.

Plus, the moon could be a valuable testing ground for space construction. no one knows what its like to try and put up a wall or run plumbing in a low grav environment, and also its a launchpad to Mars as others have said. fully manufacturing and building a craft then launching it from the moon to anywhere else would be incredibly cheaper than it is to escape the earth's gravitational field.

fastom · 01-11-2004, 01:10 AM

I think the way they worded that made "Back" to the moon an afterthought. I guess they need to prove it's possible... now that computer technology has refined a bit to allow a computer to even fit aboard the spacecraft

Fremen · 01-11-2004, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fastom
I think the way they worded that made "Back" to the moon an afterthought. I guess they need to prove it's possible... now that computer technology has refined a bit to allow a computer to even fit aboard the spacecraft

Computers have been on NASAs' 'spacecraft' for some time now.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi...rt1-intro.html

Quote:

Introduction

[7] In the first 25 years of its existence, NASA conducted five manned spaceflight programs: Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Skylab, and Shuttle. The latter four programs produced spacecraft that had on-board digital computers. The Gemini computer was a single unit dedicated to guidance and navigation functions. Apollo used computers in the command module and lunar excursion module, again primarily for guidance and navigation. Skylab had a dual computer system for attitude control of the laboratory and pointing of the solar telescope. NASA's Space Shuttle is the most computerized spacecraft built to date, with five general-purpose computers as the heart of the avionics system and twin computers on each of the main engines. The Shuttle computers dominate all checkout, guidance, navigation, systems management, payload, and powered flight functions.

NASA's manned spacecraft computers are characterized by increasing power and complexity. Without them, the rendezvous techniques developed in the Gemini program, the complex mission profiles followed in Apollo, the survival of the damaged Skylab, and the reliability of the Shuttle avionics system would not have been possible.

When NASA began to develop systems for manned spacecraft, general-purpose computers small and powerful enough to meet the requirements did not exist. Their development involved both commercial and academic organizations in repackaging computer technology for spaceflight.

Wax_off · 01-11-2004, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nhanced1
fully manufacturing and building a craft then launching it from the moon to anywhere else would be incredibly cheaper than it is to escape the earth's gravitational field.

Building a space craft would require THOUSANDS of people and huge amounts of specialized equipment permanantly on the moon. It would be insane to think that could happen in our lifetime without needlessly bankrupting our country. Much more likely would be assembling pre-manufactured parts boosted from earth. Still pointlessly expensive.

The economics of the US are all fucked up. Spending that kind of money on a program that has little or no direct benefits. Sure there are some secondary benefits, technological development and all, but why not just spend money directly on them instead of this moon boondoggle? Doesn't make sense.
All the low gravity science we need to do can be done in earth orbit, which is a whole heck of a lot closer and cheaper. And we already have a base there.

The moon only wins for cool factor, which is why Bush is making media noise about it.

hotzot · 01-11-2004, 07:22 AM

Bout fucking time!! Where's my jet pack!!!!

floydthebarber · 01-11-2004, 08:05 AM

It would be nice to see happen, but as a few here have said, I think it's just a way for the shrub to dupe people into electing him.

ARTelevision · 01-11-2004, 08:18 AM

Where human beings and human progress are concerned, the inevitable is always a good idea.

tekaweni · 01-11-2004, 08:53 AM

Ohhhh.... thought you meant HE was going

Damn.

yodapaul · 01-11-2004, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wax_off
Building a space craft would require THOUSANDS of people and huge amounts of specialized equipment permanantly on the moon. It would be insane to think that could happen in our lifetime without needlessly bankrupting our country.

The moon has about 1/8th the gravity of the earth (I think). This would make it possible to build a "deep space" ship, which wouldn't be able to land on the earth, it would land on the moon. You would not need all kinds of things, for example, a heat shield.

I would like to see humanity stop bickering with itself and concentrate on progressing our knowledge of the universe and beyond. There is SOO much stuff that we cant even dream of here on earth. Humans need to get a different view on life, and I believe that going into space with a moon base is a step in the right direction. If nothing else the conversation about space will inspire other people to take things into their own hands. Progressing the space program of humanity as a whole.

Besides, WHO said that the govenment has to pay for a moon base? WHO says ANY government has to pay for a moon base? Open space up to the business world, give the business community a reason to go into space and sit back and watch the magic happen.

hertwigssheath · 01-11-2004, 10:47 AM

last time I checked i think this nation was about 5.5 trillion dollars in debt. when we elected Bush he said he was goind to start paying that down. Just don't see how we can have all this expensive space flight stuff, a war against Iraq and pay down the debt at the same time.

Holo · 01-11-2004, 10:54 AM

Maybe we could actually try to fix our mess here first? The moon is most likely always gonna be there. As a species we dont' deserve to leave our planet. By being earthbound we keep our mess on our own planet. If there were a galactic council of aliens they would most likely agree. I like how it would take 13 years to get back up there but it was done in 69 already, 35 years ago. Shit , Computers were in short supply then. Why can't we take a few trillion and throw a new shuttle together in a couple of year with our advances? Maybe we really didn't go to the moon. I'll believe it when I see it. Till then it's just another waste of money while there are people starviing in our streets. If space is our children's future, when are we gonna teach them responsibility for our actions as a species?

Stare At The Sun · 01-11-2004, 11:08 AM

I think its a great idea, it is the future, and the sooner the better i say! Its a worthy cause, and i support it 110%!

Prince · 01-11-2004, 10:33 PM

This would be the first good thing that man has done.

NASA has been seen as a bottomless pit of billions of dollars spent for nothing, but a lot of their research over the decades has paid off in terms of technological advancement. While this will be expensive as hell, so is the rebuilding of Iraq (oh, wow, what a great move that war was), and besides considering how well on our way we are to fucking this planet up it is about time we start looking for ways to move our race to other planets. We could turn the Moon into a landfill next. Outta our way Martians, make way for the garbage man.

clifclav · 01-12-2004, 08:03 AM

Hell yeah we are already running out of space here.

Seriously though we have a responsibility as the leading countries of the planet currently to try and push the technology envelope. The money spent will be relatively small compared to the budget as a whole yet there is a promise of tremendous rewards for society as a whole.

Fly · 01-12-2004, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by turnbot
send bush to the moon. money can be saved by making it a one way trip.

i like this idea

james t kirk · 01-12-2004, 10:04 AM

Fuck the moon.

It's been done. All they'd have to do is dust off Von Braum's old drawing for the Saturn V and Bob's your uncle.

How bout a president with balls who actually makes a comittment to the idea and puts his money where his mouth is. I seem to recall W's father making a similar pitch, but it was all talk no action.

I say, let's go for Mars NOW. Well, say let's aim for Mars by the end of this decade. Now that's ambitious and that's a real goal.

The moon is just a big rock in space.

Mars is a PLANET.

Or how bout Venus. I hear it's a lot warmer there than mars.

One problem though. Werner Von Braum is dead.

Triton · 01-12-2004, 10:14 AM

Duh.

>Oil on the Moon

LoL. Guess not. So that is not the reason.

This year is an election one, so this is a standard move for a dork like Bush to try to look like a leader. But the objective is necessarily far out, and besides the geeks no one really cares that much about it.

Bottom line: this is Bush's try at leadership and another pathetic attempt at copying Kennedy's famous speech, like Nixon did when he announced the Shuttle program (which was curtailed later), Reagan with his "Space station Freedom" -- for which all the budget was spent but no hardware was ever built --, Bush 41st and his (rejected) Mars trip and so on.

All politics, no substance *whatsoever*. The last time there was substance in a space program was when Clinton decided, out of post-cold-war politics and economics, to build the space station with the Russians.

Besides that, its all BALONEY.

And yes, it is about time the stuttle gets replaced, but as the replacement will be a cheapo vehicle rather than a more capable one, well, I am not looking forward to that.

About time NASA gets its ass out of low Earth Orbit and moves to one of the Lagrange's points. if they want to go to the moon from there, that suits me fine. but first, a spaceport in lagrange's point and a *finished* long-term space station in low earth orbit

mb99usa · 01-12-2004, 01:09 PM

We need to discontinue manned flights entirely. They are a waste of money and provide no new discoveries. Besides the fact that they are dangerous.

What we should do is focus on un-manned exploratory missions. Those along the lines of Rover that can go places we cannot and provide much better data.

Glamorous? No. Scientifically better? Yes.

Kllr Wolf · 01-12-2004, 03:13 PM

the idea of spending money on the spaec program is a great idea. Making it a manned project gets more people to understand its difficulty. When NASA talks abou tteh difficulty of sapce people see it as just computers being sent to different place, which means no real connnection. When Humans go themselves more people feel connected to the event, hence more willingness to support its growth. the Space program is also good for developing new advances in almost every form of modern life. So yes, send people to the moon, and many planets after that.

01-10-2004, 06:38 AM	#42 (permalink)
Fire Warrior Smith Location: missouri	yes- as i am fond of saying, the world belongs to the bold..... __________________ Thought the harder, Heart the bolder, Mood the more as our might lessens

01-10-2004, 02:02 PM	#43 (permalink)
yodapaul Insane Location: MN	I like the whole Idea, besides who says that the US Government has to pay for the trip or the base on the moon? Why can't some business fork over part of the money needed to help establish a station on the moon? Did You know that the hotel industry has commistioned a study on what a Moon Resort would cost to build? And wheather it would make money or not? Business thinks about space and the moon more than people relize. The only thing holding space travel back is the cost per pound to put something into space. Figure out a way to lower the cost and you will have single handedly made space a lot more attractive for business. Once business gets interested it's only a matter of time before space travel will become akin to traveling on a airplane. So really the only thing that the government has to do is lower the cost of getting into space. After that it becomes a snowball effect. Just my humble opinion. __________________ I'm Just here to help. Now, Where is your problem?

01-11-2004, 12:54 AM	#47 (permalink)
Nhanced1 Insane Location: Tucson, AZ	Inspiring our young people to go into careers in science and technology is an investment that is more than worthwhile. Children who watched the moon landing broadcast grew up to lead us into the information age, who knows what today's young people could do if given the proper inspiration. Plus, the moon could be a valuable testing ground for space construction. no one knows what its like to try and put up a wall or run plumbing in a low grav environment, and also its a launchpad to Mars as others have said. fully manufacturing and building a craft then launching it from the moon to anywhere else would be incredibly cheaper than it is to escape the earth's gravitational field. __________________ "Sell Crazy Somewhere Else, We're All Stocked Up Here," Jack Nicholson - As Good As It Gets

01-11-2004, 07:22 AM	#51 (permalink)
hotzot We're having potato pancakes! Location: stalag 13	Bout fucking time!! Where's my jet pack!!!! __________________ The Bully Boys are here!

01-11-2004, 08:05 AM	#52 (permalink)
floydthebarber Insane Location: ?	It would be nice to see happen, but as a few here have said, I think it's just a way for the shrub to dupe people into electing him. __________________ wish you were here

View Poll Results: Do you think the President's new space plans are a good idea?
Yes	53	68.83%
No	24	31.17%
Voters: 77. You may not vote on this poll

01-10-2004, 05:35 AM	#41 (permalink)
Viking1064 Insane Location: New Jersey	I love space and astronomy. I was born in 1964 and remember all the landings on the moon. It was fasinating tome. I would have to have all the facts before I decide, but I'd like to kow what kind of testing they would do on the moon that could not be done int he space station? Look how many trips it took to build MIR. How many trips will it take to set up a station on the moon?

01-10-2004, 02:07 PM	#44 (permalink)
fik Crazy Location: Tacoma, WA	Hey, We are already in debt 7 trillion bucks, whats a couple billion to go to the moon gonna hurt?

01-10-2004, 08:24 PM	#45 (permalink)
anleja disconnected Location: ignoreland	I suggest using the moon for our landfill overflow.

01-11-2004, 01:10 AM	#48 (permalink)
fastom Psycho Location: way out west	I think the way they worded that made "Back" to the moon an afterthought. I guess they need to prove it's possible... now that computer technology has refined a bit to allow a computer to even fit aboard the spacecraft

01-11-2004, 08:18 AM	#53 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Where human beings and human progress are concerned, the inevitable is always a good idea. __________________ create evolution

01-11-2004, 08:53 AM	#54 (permalink)
tekaweni It wasnt me Location: Scotland	Ohhhh.... thought you meant HE was going Damn. __________________ If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always gotten

01-11-2004, 10:47 AM	#56 (permalink)
hertwigssheath brain dead Location: south carolina	last time I checked i think this nation was about 5.5 trillion dollars in debt. when we elected Bush he said he was goind to start paying that down. Just don't see how we can have all this expensive space flight stuff, a war against Iraq and pay down the debt at the same time. __________________ With a hat like that you should get a free bowl of soup, but it looks great on you... (Rodney Dangerfield, Caddyshack)

01-11-2004, 10:54 AM	#57 (permalink)
Holo A Real American	Maybe we could actually try to fix our mess here first? The moon is most likely always gonna be there. As a species we dont' deserve to leave our planet. By being earthbound we keep our mess on our own planet. If there were a galactic council of aliens they would most likely agree. I like how it would take 13 years to get back up there but it was done in 69 already, 35 years ago. Shit , Computers were in short supply then. Why can't we take a few trillion and throw a new shuttle together in a couple of year with our advances? Maybe we really didn't go to the moon. I'll believe it when I see it. Till then it's just another waste of money while there are people starviing in our streets. If space is our children's future, when are we gonna teach them responsibility for our actions as a species? __________________ I happen to like the words "fuck", "cock", "pussy", "tits", "cunt", "twat", "shit" and even "bitch". As long as I am not using them to describe you, don't go telling me whether or not I can/should use them...that is, if you want me to continue refraining from using them to describe you. ~Prince

01-11-2004, 11:08 AM	#58 (permalink)
Stare At The Sun Eh? Location: Somewhere over the rainbow	I think its a great idea, it is the future, and the sooner the better i say! Its a worthy cause, and i support it 110%!

01-11-2004, 10:33 PM	#59 (permalink)
Prince /nɑndəsˈkrɪpt/ Location: LV-426	This would be the first good thing that man has done. NASA has been seen as a bottomless pit of billions of dollars spent for nothing, but a lot of their research over the decades has paid off in terms of technological advancement. While this will be expensive as hell, so is the rebuilding of Iraq (oh, wow, what a great move that war was), and besides considering how well on our way we are to fucking this planet up it is about time we start looking for ways to move our race to other planets. We could turn the Moon into a landfill next. Outta our way Martians, make way for the garbage man. __________________ Who is John Galt?

01-12-2004, 08:03 AM	#60 (permalink)
clifclav absolute relativist Location: D.C.	Hell yeah we are already running out of space here. Seriously though we have a responsibility as the leading countries of the planet currently to try and push the technology envelope. The money spent will be relatively small compared to the budget as a whole yet there is a promise of tremendous rewards for society as a whole. __________________ Neither rain , nor cold, nor dark of night shall.......ahh whatever, just get me a beer!

01-12-2004, 10:04 AM	#62 (permalink)
james t kirk Junkie Location: Toronto	Fuck the moon. It's been done. All they'd have to do is dust off Von Braum's old drawing for the Saturn V and Bob's your uncle. How bout a president with balls who actually makes a comittment to the idea and puts his money where his mouth is. I seem to recall W's father making a similar pitch, but it was all talk no action. I say, let's go for Mars NOW. Well, say let's aim for Mars by the end of this decade. Now that's ambitious and that's a real goal. The moon is just a big rock in space. Mars is a PLANET. Or how bout Venus. I hear it's a lot warmer there than mars. One problem though. Werner Von Braum is dead.

01-12-2004, 10:14 AM	#63 (permalink)
Triton Banned Location: Ashenvale	Duh. >Oil on the Moon LoL. Guess not. So that is not the reason. This year is an election one, so this is a standard move for a dork like Bush to try to look like a leader. But the objective is necessarily far out, and besides the geeks no one really cares that much about it. Bottom line: this is Bush's try at leadership and another pathetic attempt at copying Kennedy's famous speech, like Nixon did when he announced the Shuttle program (which was curtailed later), Reagan with his "Space station Freedom" -- for which all the budget was spent but no hardware was ever built --, Bush 41st and his (rejected) Mars trip and so on. All politics, no substance whatsoever. The last time there was substance in a space program was when Clinton decided, out of post-cold-war politics and economics, to build the space station with the Russians. Besides that, its all BALONEY. And yes, it is about time the stuttle gets replaced, but as the replacement will be a cheapo vehicle rather than a more capable one, well, I am not looking forward to that. About time NASA gets its ass out of low Earth Orbit and moves to one of the Lagrange's points. if they want to go to the moon from there, that suits me fine. but first, a spaceport in lagrange's point and a finished long-term space station in low earth orbit

01-12-2004, 01:09 PM	#64 (permalink)
mb99usa Keep on rolling. It only hurts for a little while. Location: wherever I am	We need to discontinue manned flights entirely. They are a waste of money and provide no new discoveries. Besides the fact that they are dangerous. What we should do is focus on un-manned exploratory missions. Those along the lines of Rover that can go places we cannot and provide much better data. Glamorous? No. Scientifically better? Yes. __________________ So, what's your point? It's not an attitude, it's a way of life.

01-12-2004, 03:13 PM	#65 (permalink)
Kllr Wolf Psycho Location: Lubbock, TX	the idea of spending money on the spaec program is a great idea. Making it a manned project gets more people to understand its difficulty. When NASA talks abou tteh difficulty of sapce people see it as just computers being sent to different place, which means no real connnection. When Humans go themselves more people feel connected to the event, hence more willingness to support its growth. the Space program is also good for developing new advances in almost every form of modern life. So yes, send people to the moon, and many planets after that. __________________ Caffeine - the molecule of life.