To the moon alice - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ICER · 12-24-2004, 02:53 PM

I know that we are planning to go back to the moon (the debate if we ever did is a topic for an another thread in a different forum) To achieve this. They are building a craft for the trip. My question is, WHY? We already have the lunar lander. Cannot we not use the shuttle to ferry it to and from the moon?

I have done a little research into this. The only reason that was given to me was because of the radiation from the Van Allen belt. Here are the facts about Earths radiation belt

“The Earth has two regions of trapped fast particles. The inner radiation belt discovered by Van Allen is relatively compact, extending perhaps one Earth radius above the equator (1 RE = 6371 km or about 4000 miles). It consists of very energetic protons, a by-product of collisions by cosmic ray ions with atoms of the atmosphere. The number of such ions is relatively small, and the inner belt therefore accumulates slowly, but because trapping near Earth is very stable, rather high intensities are reached, even though their build-up may take years.
Further out is the large region of the ring current, containing ions and electrons of much lower energy (the most energetic among them also known as the "outer radiation belt"). Unlike the inner belt, this population fluctuates widely, rising when magnetic storms inject fresh particles from the tail of the magnetosphere, then gradually falling off again. The ring current energy is mainly carried by the ions, most of which are protons.
However, one also sees in the ring current "alpha particles," atoms of helium which have lost their two electrons, a type of ion that is plentiful in the solar wind. In addition, a certain percentage are O+ oxygen ions, similar to those in the ionosphere of the Earth, though much more energetic. This mixture of ions suggests that ring current particles probably come from more than one source.”

Source of info http://phy6.org/Education/Iradbelt.html

Is this really a factor, cannot the shuttle be shielded the same way the Gemini crafts where? If so, Could the shuttled be use in this way?

flat5 · 12-25-2004, 04:32 AM

If there was a simple solution I think NASA would use it.
If they don't use it, the term 'pork barrel' comes to mind.

cyrnel · 12-25-2004, 05:12 AM

Lots of overhead in the shuttle system. The orbiter & engines don't have the power/mass needed to go beyond low earth orbit (~150-300Miles). The engines couldn't do it even if you loaded the cargo bay with enough fuel. Remember, escape, lunar orbit, drop & return LM, escape & return. They might be able to come up with "magnum" SRBs but that'd be another 5-10years design & testing for a vehicle that would be at end-of-life. I've heard NASA guys mention the return would require additional fuel for deceleration too since the design can't handle the G's of re-entry.

We'll probably see shuttles used to ferry large components of whatever's designed to the ISS for the final trip. That'd be the big advantage over Apollo where they had to get everything away from Earth in one shot. We don't even have those engines anymore so the incremental approach seems smart.

tecoyah · 12-25-2004, 10:04 AM

I believe the Idea behind a return to the moon is focused on final research before commercialization. The Apollo missions were simply to prove it could be done, and to send a message of US superiority. The hardware for Apollo would be useless in the new venture as it lacks the fundementals required to accomplish the next phase of Lunar exploration. Think of it as attempting to win Daytona with a model T ford.

ICER · 12-25-2004, 10:32 AM

Well, we are not exactly using the old model craft to return. We are talking about the Space Shuttle. Which I think can all agree is a far cry from the Apollo craft.

As for the thrust/fuel factor, I took that into consideration. The Apollo craft coasted almost the entire journey. Not much thrust was needed to break away from the earth's orbit as they sling shot their way around and out. And if they did need more fuel for the trip. They can refuel at the ISS, could they not?

tecoyah · 12-26-2004, 02:07 PM

No ....they could not. And the shuttle fleet is incapable of deep space flight. The hardware needed to make a moon trip is not currently in the inventory of our space agency. Thus this news:

NASA Picks Science Team for Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Mission
By Leonard David
Senior Space Writer
posted: 23 December 2004
08:57 am ET

BOULDER, Colo. -- NASA announced Wednesday the suite of U.S. science investigators for its Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) project, as well as a Russian scientist.

The U.S. Moon probe is the first spacecraft to be built as part of the Vision for Space Exploration, put into motion earlier this year by U.S. President George W. Bush. LRO is slated for a liftoff in the fall of 2008, under the auspices of NASA’s Robotic Lunar Exploration Program.

The LRO underpins NASA’s interest in replanting human footprints on the Moon. President Bush has called for the space agency to conduct the first extended human expedition to the lunar surface as early as 2015, but no later than the year 2020.

Not only will LRO characterize future robotic and human landing spots, the spacecraft will be equipped to inventory possible resources for human crews to “live off the land” -- in this case what’s available on the crater-pocked Moon. Another key duty of the LRO is to characterize the lunar radiation environment and its impact on humans.

Lunar investigators

The six selected investigations and principal investigators (PI) for the LRO are:

n Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter (LOLA): Determines the global topography of the lunar surface at high resolution, measure landing site slopes and search for polar ices in shadowed regions. PI, David Smith, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland.

n Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC): Acquires targeted images of the lunar surface capable of resolving small-scale features that could be landing site hazards, as well as wide-angle images at multiple wavelengths of the lunar poles to document changing illumination conditions and potential resources. PI, Mark Robinson, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.

n Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector (LEND): Maps the flux of neutrons from the lunar surface to search for evidence of water ice and provide measurements of the space radiation environment which can be useful for future human exploration. PI, Igor Mitrofanov, Institute for Space Research, and Federal Space Agency, Moscow.

n Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment: Charts the temperature of the entire lunar surface at roughly 985 feet (300 meter) horizontal scales to identify cold-traps and potential ice deposits. PI, David Paige, University of California, Los Angeles.

n Lyman-Alpha Mapping Project (LAMP): Observes the entire lunar surface in the far ultraviolet. LAMP will search for surface ices and frosts in the polar regions and provide images of permanently shadowed regions illuminated only by starlight. PI, Alan Stern, Southwest Research Institute, Boulder, Colorado.

n Cosmic Ray Telescope for the Effects of Radiation (CRaTER): Investigates the effect of galactic cosmic rays on tissue-equivalent plastics as a constraint on models of biological response to background space radiation. PI, Harlan Spence, Boston University, Massachusetts.

Instrumentation provided by these selected measurement investigations will be the payload of the mission scheduled to launch in October 2008.

Whole new ball game

“LRO will deliver measurements that will be critical to the key decisions we must make before the end of this decade,” said NASA's Associate Administrator for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, Craig Steidle.

“We are extremely excited by this innovative payload, and we are confident it will fulfill our expectations and support the Vision for Space Exploration,” Steidle explained in a NASA press statement.

“LRO is a great mission, and long overdue,” said Alan Stern of Southwest Research Institute here. “It promises to locate any ice near the lunar poles…which will greatly advance the cause of exploration.”

Stern told SPACE.com that LRO will also return scientific and engineering datasets of “stunning quality” and will revolutionize our understanding of the Moon and our ability to stage human missions there in the next decade. “LRO is the kickoff to a whole new ball game for NASA."

The LRO project is managed by NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. This space agency field center will also acquire the launch system and spacecraft, as well as perform payload accommodations, mission systems engineering and assurance duties.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ce_041223.html

These next steps are intended to create a permanent humn outpost on the moon in the future.....no small feat, and all new hardware will be required.

ICER · 12-26-2004, 02:49 PM

Excellent, Thank you Tecoyah. That answer a whole slew of questions I had.

fuzyfuzer · 12-26-2004, 03:06 PM

since we have to build an entirely new ship to go to the moon we may as well make it more capable than it has to be. since our future plans are to go to mars why not use the same ship. something that is an engine sperate but attached to a living system. why not kill two birds with one stone. make the ship ready for nuclear power engines even if it doesn't have them at first.

everything i said was worthless but it makes since but probably won't be done. it is somthing that would only be done if research was done by a private commany.

ICER · 12-27-2004, 08:23 PM

HMMMMMM, I wonder if they could build an add-on to the shuttle. Kind of what they did in the movie Species II. It should be allot cheaper then building from scratch.

shakran · 12-27-2004, 09:25 PM

Argh. Icer, trust everyone when they say the shuttle cannot make it to the moon. Even if you give it enough engines/fuel to get there, it's not designed for a moon flight. Its software alone would have to be totally redone in order to calculate lunar trajectories. It's a low-earth orbit space truck, and that's all it will ever be.

Redesigning the shuttle for safe lunar flight would take FAR more money and time than just designing a new ship to do it.

Plus, the old LEM's are #1 no longer around (the originals were destroyed since they were jettisoned after they re-docked with the command module) and the tools to make them have long since disappeared. Just as it would take immense time and money to tool up to start building model T's again, it would take even more to start building original LEM's.

Not only that, the apollo program was a proof of concept program. Can we get to the moon? It answered that. But the LEM could only carry a small amount of samples back to the command module with it. It could only carry 2 astronauts. It couldn't carry any construction materials down to the moon. It was a major stretch just to get it to carry the lunar rover. It'd be much smarter to design a new LEM that could carry more people and cargo. This way it could be used to start construction on a lunar base from which to launch the Mars mission. It could also then carry back samples from the moon so we could see what kind of resources we can get from it (fuel, etc).

Using the old stuff would cost more and be less effective than designing new.

ICER · 12-27-2004, 11:27 PM

I was just theorizing an idea. The ability to think outside the box is one of my habits. You should hear my idea for cleaning up air pollution. It would work. But the cure would be worse then the disease.

I would post topics like this in the theory forum. But we don't have one.

tecoyah · 12-29-2004, 07:47 AM

But we do have the Knowledge forum..........which is the appropriate place for such discussions. I for one, would be quite interested in your concepts, as these types of conversations make one think, and that is always a good thing.

The current direction of Lunar exploration will focus on Robotic missions, leading up to the construction of a permanent base (again constructed by robotics) to be manned as a science station. This is still in the planning stages, and will take decades to become a reality.

excerpt from Bushs plan:

Marching orders

Earlier this year, U.S. President George W. Bush spelled out a strategy for space exploration beyond low Earth orbit. For the Moon the White House marching orders to NASA were:

* Undertake lunar exploration activities to enable sustained human and robotic exploration of Mars and more distant destinations in the solar system.
* Starting no later than 2008, initiate a series of robotic missions to the Moon to prepare for and support future human exploration activities.
* Conduct the first extended human expedition to the lunar surface as early as 2015, but no later than the year 2020.
* Use lunar exploration activities to further science, and to develop and test new approaches, technologies, and systems, including use of lunar and other space resources, to support sustained human space exploration to Mars and other destinations.

NASA strategists have already begun pointing to the lunar south pole and its possible stockroom of ice as the place of choice for an initial encampment of explorers.

Hope he actually funds it all.

Paradise Lost · 12-29-2004, 11:20 AM

Kind of off topic, but hopefully they privatize alot of this soon, since it'll be alot easier to
fund a project from people who already have the money, rather than wasting ours.

I'm guessing any new ship they do decide to send up to the moon while most likely
resemble the Apollo ones, only, most likely, much larger. I can't see it resembling
anything like the Shuttle is...

12-24-2004, 02:53 PM	#1 (permalink)
ICER Chilled to Perfection Location: Dallas, TX	To the moon alice I know that we are planning to go back to the moon (the debate if we ever did is a topic for an another thread in a different forum) To achieve this. They are building a craft for the trip. My question is, WHY? We already have the lunar lander. Cannot we not use the shuttle to ferry it to and from the moon? I have done a little research into this. The only reason that was given to me was because of the radiation from the Van Allen belt. Here are the facts about Earths radiation belt “The Earth has two regions of trapped fast particles. The inner radiation belt discovered by Van Allen is relatively compact, extending perhaps one Earth radius above the equator (1 RE = 6371 km or about 4000 miles). It consists of very energetic protons, a by-product of collisions by cosmic ray ions with atoms of the atmosphere. The number of such ions is relatively small, and the inner belt therefore accumulates slowly, but because trapping near Earth is very stable, rather high intensities are reached, even though their build-up may take years. Further out is the large region of the ring current, containing ions and electrons of much lower energy (the most energetic among them also known as the "outer radiation belt"). Unlike the inner belt, this population fluctuates widely, rising when magnetic storms inject fresh particles from the tail of the magnetosphere, then gradually falling off again. The ring current energy is mainly carried by the ions, most of which are protons. However, one also sees in the ring current "alpha particles," atoms of helium which have lost their two electrons, a type of ion that is plentiful in the solar wind. In addition, a certain percentage are O+ oxygen ions, similar to those in the ionosphere of the Earth, though much more energetic. This mixture of ions suggests that ring current particles probably come from more than one source.” Source of info http://phy6.org/Education/Iradbelt.html Is this really a factor, cannot the shuttle be shielded the same way the Gemini crafts where? If so, Could the shuttled be use in this way? __________________ What's the difference between congress and a penitentiary? One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners. ~~David Letterman

12-25-2004, 10:04 AM	#4 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	I believe the Idea behind a return to the moon is focused on final research before commercialization. The Apollo missions were simply to prove it could be done, and to send a message of US superiority. The hardware for Apollo would be useless in the new venture as it lacks the fundementals required to accomplish the next phase of Lunar exploration. Think of it as attempting to win Daytona with a model T ford. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

12-25-2004, 10:32 AM	#5 (permalink)
ICER Chilled to Perfection Location: Dallas, TX	Well, we are not exactly using the old model craft to return. We are talking about the Space Shuttle. Which I think can all agree is a far cry from the Apollo craft. As for the thrust/fuel factor, I took that into consideration. The Apollo craft coasted almost the entire journey. Not much thrust was needed to break away from the earth's orbit as they sling shot their way around and out. And if they did need more fuel for the trip. They can refuel at the ISS, could they not? __________________ What's the difference between congress and a penitentiary? One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners. ~~David Letterman

12-26-2004, 02:07 PM	#6 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	No ....they could not. And the shuttle fleet is incapable of deep space flight. The hardware needed to make a moon trip is not currently in the inventory of our space agency. Thus this news: NASA Picks Science Team for Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Mission By Leonard David Senior Space Writer posted: 23 December 2004 08:57 am ET BOULDER, Colo. -- NASA announced Wednesday the suite of U.S. science investigators for its Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) project, as well as a Russian scientist. The U.S. Moon probe is the first spacecraft to be built as part of the Vision for Space Exploration, put into motion earlier this year by U.S. President George W. Bush. LRO is slated for a liftoff in the fall of 2008, under the auspices of NASA’s Robotic Lunar Exploration Program. The LRO underpins NASA’s interest in replanting human footprints on the Moon. President Bush has called for the space agency to conduct the first extended human expedition to the lunar surface as early as 2015, but no later than the year 2020. Not only will LRO characterize future robotic and human landing spots, the spacecraft will be equipped to inventory possible resources for human crews to “live off the land” -- in this case what’s available on the crater-pocked Moon. Another key duty of the LRO is to characterize the lunar radiation environment and its impact on humans. Lunar investigators The six selected investigations and principal investigators (PI) for the LRO are: n Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter (LOLA): Determines the global topography of the lunar surface at high resolution, measure landing site slopes and search for polar ices in shadowed regions. PI, David Smith, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland. n Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC): Acquires targeted images of the lunar surface capable of resolving small-scale features that could be landing site hazards, as well as wide-angle images at multiple wavelengths of the lunar poles to document changing illumination conditions and potential resources. PI, Mark Robinson, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois. n Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector (LEND): Maps the flux of neutrons from the lunar surface to search for evidence of water ice and provide measurements of the space radiation environment which can be useful for future human exploration. PI, Igor Mitrofanov, Institute for Space Research, and Federal Space Agency, Moscow. n Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment: Charts the temperature of the entire lunar surface at roughly 985 feet (300 meter) horizontal scales to identify cold-traps and potential ice deposits. PI, David Paige, University of California, Los Angeles. n Lyman-Alpha Mapping Project (LAMP): Observes the entire lunar surface in the far ultraviolet. LAMP will search for surface ices and frosts in the polar regions and provide images of permanently shadowed regions illuminated only by starlight. PI, Alan Stern, Southwest Research Institute, Boulder, Colorado. n Cosmic Ray Telescope for the Effects of Radiation (CRaTER): Investigates the effect of galactic cosmic rays on tissue-equivalent plastics as a constraint on models of biological response to background space radiation. PI, Harlan Spence, Boston University, Massachusetts. Instrumentation provided by these selected measurement investigations will be the payload of the mission scheduled to launch in October 2008. Whole new ball game “LRO will deliver measurements that will be critical to the key decisions we must make before the end of this decade,” said NASA's Associate Administrator for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, Craig Steidle. “We are extremely excited by this innovative payload, and we are confident it will fulfill our expectations and support the Vision for Space Exploration,” Steidle explained in a NASA press statement. “LRO is a great mission, and long overdue,” said Alan Stern of Southwest Research Institute here. “It promises to locate any ice near the lunar poles…which will greatly advance the cause of exploration.” Stern told SPACE.com that LRO will also return scientific and engineering datasets of “stunning quality” and will revolutionize our understanding of the Moon and our ability to stage human missions there in the next decade. “LRO is the kickoff to a whole new ball game for NASA." The LRO project is managed by NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. This space agency field center will also acquire the launch system and spacecraft, as well as perform payload accommodations, mission systems engineering and assurance duties. http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ce_041223.html These next steps are intended to create a permanent humn outpost on the moon in the future.....no small feat, and all new hardware will be required. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

12-26-2004, 02:49 PM	#7 (permalink)
ICER Chilled to Perfection Location: Dallas, TX	Excellent, Thank you Tecoyah. That answer a whole slew of questions I had. __________________ What's the difference between congress and a penitentiary? One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners. ~~David Letterman

12-25-2004, 04:32 AM	#2 (permalink)
flat5 Very Insignificant Pawn Location: Amsterdam, NL	If there was a simple solution I think NASA would use it. If they don't use it, the term 'pork barrel' comes to mind.

12-25-2004, 05:12 AM	#3 (permalink)
cyrnel Adequate Location: In my angry-dome.	Lots of overhead in the shuttle system. The orbiter & engines don't have the power/mass needed to go beyond low earth orbit (~150-300Miles). The engines couldn't do it even if you loaded the cargo bay with enough fuel. Remember, escape, lunar orbit, drop & return LM, escape & return. They might be able to come up with "magnum" SRBs but that'd be another 5-10years design & testing for a vehicle that would be at end-of-life. I've heard NASA guys mention the return would require additional fuel for deceleration too since the design can't handle the G's of re-entry. We'll probably see shuttles used to ferry large components of whatever's designed to the ISS for the final trip. That'd be the big advantage over Apollo where they had to get everything away from Earth in one shot. We don't even have those engines anymore so the incremental approach seems smart.

12-26-2004, 03:06 PM	#8 (permalink)
fuzyfuzer Insane Location: st. louis	since we have to build an entirely new ship to go to the moon we may as well make it more capable than it has to be. since our future plans are to go to mars why not use the same ship. something that is an engine sperate but attached to a living system. why not kill two birds with one stone. make the ship ready for nuclear power engines even if it doesn't have them at first. everything i said was worthless but it makes since but probably won't be done. it is somthing that would only be done if research was done by a private commany. __________________ "The difference between commiment and involvment is like a ham and egg breakfast the chicken was involved but the pig was commited" "Thrice happy is the nation that has a glorious history. Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat." Theodore Roosevelt

12-27-2004, 08:23 PM	#9 (permalink)
ICER Chilled to Perfection Location: Dallas, TX	HMMMMMM, I wonder if they could build an add-on to the shuttle. Kind of what they did in the movie Species II. It should be allot cheaper then building from scratch. __________________ What's the difference between congress and a penitentiary? One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners. ~~David Letterman

12-27-2004, 09:25 PM	#10 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	Argh. Icer, trust everyone when they say the shuttle cannot make it to the moon. Even if you give it enough engines/fuel to get there, it's not designed for a moon flight. Its software alone would have to be totally redone in order to calculate lunar trajectories. It's a low-earth orbit space truck, and that's all it will ever be. Redesigning the shuttle for safe lunar flight would take FAR more money and time than just designing a new ship to do it. Plus, the old LEM's are #1 no longer around (the originals were destroyed since they were jettisoned after they re-docked with the command module) and the tools to make them have long since disappeared. Just as it would take immense time and money to tool up to start building model T's again, it would take even more to start building original LEM's. Not only that, the apollo program was a proof of concept program. Can we get to the moon? It answered that. But the LEM could only carry a small amount of samples back to the command module with it. It could only carry 2 astronauts. It couldn't carry any construction materials down to the moon. It was a major stretch just to get it to carry the lunar rover. It'd be much smarter to design a new LEM that could carry more people and cargo. This way it could be used to start construction on a lunar base from which to launch the Mars mission. It could also then carry back samples from the moon so we could see what kind of resources we can get from it (fuel, etc). Using the old stuff would cost more and be less effective than designing new.

12-27-2004, 11:27 PM	#11 (permalink)
ICER Chilled to Perfection Location: Dallas, TX	I was just theorizing an idea. The ability to think outside the box is one of my habits. You should hear my idea for cleaning up air pollution. It would work. But the cure would be worse then the disease. I would post topics like this in the theory forum. But we don't have one. __________________ What's the difference between congress and a penitentiary? One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners. ~~David Letterman

12-29-2004, 07:47 AM	#12 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	But we do have the Knowledge forum..........which is the appropriate place for such discussions. I for one, would be quite interested in your concepts, as these types of conversations make one think, and that is always a good thing. The current direction of Lunar exploration will focus on Robotic missions, leading up to the construction of a permanent base (again constructed by robotics) to be manned as a science station. This is still in the planning stages, and will take decades to become a reality. excerpt from Bushs plan: Marching orders Earlier this year, U.S. President George W. Bush spelled out a strategy for space exploration beyond low Earth orbit. For the Moon the White House marching orders to NASA were: * Undertake lunar exploration activities to enable sustained human and robotic exploration of Mars and more distant destinations in the solar system. * Starting no later than 2008, initiate a series of robotic missions to the Moon to prepare for and support future human exploration activities. * Conduct the first extended human expedition to the lunar surface as early as 2015, but no later than the year 2020. * Use lunar exploration activities to further science, and to develop and test new approaches, technologies, and systems, including use of lunar and other space resources, to support sustained human space exploration to Mars and other destinations. NASA strategists have already begun pointing to the lunar south pole and its possible stockroom of ice as the place of choice for an initial encampment of explorers. Hope he actually funds it all. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

12-29-2004, 11:20 AM	#13 (permalink)
Paradise Lost "Afternoon everybody." "NORM!" Location: Poland, Ohio // Clarion University of PA.	Kind of off topic, but hopefully they privatize alot of this soon, since it'll be alot easier to fund a project from people who already have the money, rather than wasting ours. I'm guessing any new ship they do decide to send up to the moon while most likely resemble the Apollo ones, only, most likely, much larger. I can't see it resembling anything like the Shuttle is... __________________ "Marino could do it."