Re: What Shall We Do With the Moon Once We Get There?

On Jun 9, 6:29 am, "Martha Adams" <mh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"BradGuth" <bradg...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:0d4b9d76-ca6d-4cb8-88c9-ba848cc7804e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



On Jun 8, 4:59 pm, "Alan Erskine" <alan.ersk...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Mark R. Whittington" <mwhitti...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
messagenews:7fb5c7ef-f7f2-4d42-8f31-74e1721356e8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For the first time in over thirty five years, the Moon has become
the
next frontier. The United States has committed to returning human
astronauts to the Moon by the end of the next decade. China has
hinted
that it intends to do this also. A variety of countries, including
the
United States and China, but also India, Europe, and Japan, have
either sent robotic probes into lunar orbit or are on the verge of
doing so.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/810865/what_shall_we_do_with...

The U.S. hasn't committed to a return yet; they're still playing with
Ares 1
(aka The Pencil, but better referred to as The Vibrator), which will
hopefully be cancelled by the next government and be replaced by the
Delta
IV Heavy. That'll leave the Ares V all on its own and the U.S. can't
afford
it.

China already provides CATS, at perhaps as little as 10% as spendy as
anything the U.S. can muster up. China has bigger stuff on its way.

Of whatever China can't deploy to the moon, Russia can.

All that's needed is a very well shielded fly-by-rocket lander with
ample payload tonnage and fuel to spare. Perhaps India could sweat-
shop one those for us.
. - Brad Guth

Is there some good reason to return to exploring Luna
today? I would like to hear what it is.

Once we've blown up and otherwise contaminated Earth with our WWIII,
the interior of our moon could start looking darn good, not to mention
the LSE-CM/ISS (all 256e6 tonnes of it) that's taking advantage of our
moon's L1. We could also relocate our moon along with its extended
LSE-CM/ISS out to Earth's L1.


I think the
Ares hardware is a good try at making sensible use of
the Shuttle's industrial base, but the Ares program is
stretched out over so many years -- two or three
8-year Presidential administrations and about twice as
many Congresses -- that I just haven't any conviction
it will actually accomplish anything timely. China
and Japan and India, not handicapped by the political
concerns that hamper NASA, can do what needs doing in
a much shorter time frame than that.

In my view, the way out is to think a little about
reality, which seems to me to lead to an urgent program
to implement Buzz Aldrin's cycler idea. By building a
longterm base oriented to becoming a permanent
settlement on a near-Terra/near-Mars asteroid, we both
find out much more about asteroids and their Belt, but
also we develop a facility we need. Zubrin's thinking
is central to getting this right: his Mars Direct
program is the most economical and immediate way to
put settlements on Mars; but given more money as our
government can raise, the cycler base/settlement idea
seems better over the long run.

Speaking of money. Let's suppose we invent a new
unit quantity of cash: the Zubrin. One Zubrin is the
amount of money to put a settlement on Mars. I'd
guess $100 million is a reasonable guess as the dollar
value of one Zubrin in today's dollars (after serious
inflation owing to the two ongoing pork wars). So
when people argue space costs too much, *how many
Zubrins per week* are these pork wars costing? ??

Make that Zubrin worth a trillion per living soul on Mars, or at least
worth a billion if it's merely a one-way ticket to ride.

Of course, by the time any Zubrin gets a human surviving on Mars,
we'll be paying at least $100/gallon for our fossil fuel and $10/kwhr.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

.

Relevant Pages