PDA

View Full Version : VP Pence Vows Return to the Moon, Boots on Mars during KSC Visit



Fraser
2017-Jul-08, 03:40 PM
KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FL – Vice President Mike Pence, during a whirlwind visit to NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, vowed that America would fortify our leadership in space under the Trump Administration with impressive goals by forcefully stating that “our nation will return to the moon, and we will put American boots on the […]
The post VP Pence Vows Return to the Moon, Boots on Mars during KSC Visit (https://www.universetoday.com/136332/vp-pence-vows-return-to-the-moon-boots-on-mars-during-ksc-visit/) appeared first on Universe Today (https://www.universetoday.com).


More... (https://www.universetoday.com/136332/vp-pence-vows-return-to-the-moon-boots-on-mars-during-ksc-visit/)

Noisy Rhysling
2017-Jul-08, 04:01 PM
Wait! The 1% of the US budget NASA gets used to be a odious burden on the taxpayers.

swampyankee
2017-Jul-09, 02:18 PM
Wait! The 1% of the US budget NASA gets used to be a odious burden on the taxpayers.

It's like pork barrel, which is spending in other districts, never one's own.

I'm not terribly sanguine about real, self-funded commercial space exploration, but the idea of NASA having a goal that is realistically achievable in a decade is attractive. A human Moon landing and short-term (up to a fortnight or so) occupation is that; a human Mars landing is not.

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-09, 03:42 PM
Putting boots on Mars should be a doddle. A pair of boots must only weigh a few kilos.

:whistle:

R.A.F.
2017-Jul-09, 03:52 PM
Past administrations have made similar promises, therefore I just don't have confidence that anything will come of this...

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-09, 03:57 PM
I would worry that the politicians just want the glory of it all.
There wouldn't be much point in going back to the Moon without a reason, would there?
Would a good reason be to build a large telescope, larger than Hubble?

swampyankee
2017-Jul-09, 04:10 PM
I would worry that the politicians just want the glory of it all.
There wouldn't be much point in going back to the Moon without a reason, would there?
Would a good reason be to build a large telescope, larger than Hubble?

Probably easier to build one in space; we can do that now. On the other hand, putting a large radio-telescope on the far side of the Moon could be interesting: it would be blocked from all Earth's radio noise.

cjameshuff
2017-Jul-09, 06:28 PM
Probably easier to build one in space; we can do that now. On the other hand, putting a large radio-telescope on the far side of the Moon could be interesting: it would be blocked from all Earth's radio noise.

It would not be blocked from all the noise, there would still be the signals that diffract over the horizon, plus it would be subject to interference from human activities on and around the moon. It would also be limited to viewing a small fraction of the sky at any given time, determined by Earth's rotation. Plus it would have to deal with electrostatically charged lunar dust, extreme day/night temperature variations, gravitational distortion of the reflector as it moves, likely shutdowns every lunar night due to lack of power (meaning it's shut down whenever it's facing away from the sun)...

The moon is a bad place for a telescope of any kind. If you can put one there, you can put one in orbit that's not half-crippled. The Earth-Sun L4 and L5 points would be good locations...steady sunlight, constant temperatures, no dust, the entire sky available for observation at any given time (provided your target isn't behind the sun or something), and no gravity to distort your dish, which could then be made truly enormous by the standards of anything stuck on a planetary surface. Interference from Earth would be managed by simple distance and by active monitoring: a small dish pointed at Earth will be more sensitive to the interfering signals than a large dish pointed away from Earth.

swampyankee
2017-Jul-09, 10:14 PM
Really, how much terrestrial RF will there be at a location more the a few km from the band between the visible an non-visible hemispheres?

cjameshuff
2017-Jul-09, 11:46 PM
Really, how much terrestrial RF will there be at a location more the a few km from the band between the visible an non-visible hemispheres?

Surface wave transmission is used over hundreds of kilometers on Earth, where it has to compete with other broadcasts and other Earthly interference, not just interfere with faint astronomical sources. And it's not just Earth emissions you have to worry about, any radio users on the moon who aren't using satellite relays and don't want to be limited to line of sight will likely use such modes, plus there's unintentional emissions from industrial activities such as electrolytic smelting operations, which would tend to be in the low frequency ranges that work well for ground propagation. Unless you're going to great expense to land pre-built radio telescope components on the moon (which would be far more expensive than putting it in orbit), such industrial facilities are a prerequisite and would need to be reasonably close to the telescope location to allow the construction materials to be transported there.

Jens
2017-Jul-10, 07:47 AM
It would not be blocked from all the noise, there would still be the signals that diffract over the horizon, plus it would be subject to interference from human activities on and around the moon. It would also be limited to viewing a small fraction of the sky at any given time, determined by Earth's rotation.

Determined by the earth's rotation, or by the moon's rotation?

cjameshuff
2017-Jul-10, 11:05 AM
Determined by the earth's rotation, or by the moon's rotation?

Ah, the moon's.

Hypmotoad
2017-Jul-10, 11:24 AM
Past administrations have made similar promises, therefore I just don't have confidence that anything will come of this...

Especially in the current political climate. Honestly though, Mars would be great but I'd settle for just having the Webb telescope launch go

off without a hitch. (Wanted to say James Webb telescope but isn't that the award winning actor? It's early.)

Noisy Rhysling
2017-Jul-10, 12:37 PM
I'm not terribly sanguine about real, self-funded commercial space exploration, ...

Elon Musk is showing how to do it.

swampyankee
2017-Jul-10, 03:57 PM
Elon Musk is showing how to do it.

I'll believe that when he launches an astronomical satellite or a probe to Neptune or something similar. Making money by launching stuff into orbit for paying customers isn't exploration, any more than a charter operator flying customers to a fishing spot in Alaska is.

Trebuchet
2017-Jul-10, 05:41 PM
Especially in the current political climate. Honestly though, Mars would be great but I'd settle for just having the Webb telescope launch go

off without a hitch. (Wanted to say James Webb telescope but isn't that the award winning actor? It's early.)

James Webb (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_E._Webb) is correct. I'm not familiar with an actor other than Jack "Just the Facts, Ma'am" Webb.

Hypmotoad
2017-Jul-11, 11:15 PM
James Webb (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_E._Webb) is correct. I'm not familiar with an actor other than Jack "Just the Facts, Ma'am" Webb.

You've seen him, not worth googling but he's one of those actors you recognize from being on everything but don't care enough to

remember his name lol.