Back to the Moon

[sbisson]

Apparently, Pres. Bush will shortly announce plans for a permanent moonbase and a manned Mars mission.

Sounds like a recipe for an Allen Steele or a Ben Bova future. Which, to be honest, isn't such a bad thing - even if I do want to live in a Michael Flynn tomorrow...

Comments

[scottscidmore.livejournal.com]

This was rumored several weeks ago. Since then I've heard from a few folks more or less connected with NASA; their opinions on this sum up to

• The Moon is a good place to start, it looks to be possible to eventually have a self-sustaining (or nearly so) base there.



• The Moon base is partially military related, the base itself a 'cover' for pumping money into launch craft and the like.



• Most of this is election year smoke and mirrors. The trade and budget deficits (http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0109/p02s01-usec.html) are going to make it tough to spend much money on programs such as this, even more so if the current financial problems trigger climbing interest rates.

My own feelings are that the Moon base is a realistic and useful goal, there's a lot that can be learned there and it's a quick trip there if something goes wrong. However, 10 to 15 years is way too soon for manned expeditions to Mars, unless the purpose is to have some more space martyrs. And I don't see where the US is going to get the money for this in the next 5 to 10 years, assuming we can avoid a catastrophic financial collapse as some are worried about.

[brisingamen.livejournal.com]

From my point of view, I really want to live in a well-written tomorrow. So Flynn or Steele, with a preference for Flynn.

[ajshepherd.livejournal.com]

Didn't his dad announce pretty much the same thing during his reign? A manned mission to Mars, at least.

I'm all in favour. If the US spent half as much on space as they do on 'defence' (Who was it who said "the best defence is a good offence"?) they'd be orbiting Jupiter by now...

[the-gardener.livejournal.com]

Everyone should try to contain their excitement, I think. The real (probably) reason for the intended announcement will be to divert public attention from policy failures elsewhere -- just as JFK announced a commitment to a manned Moon landing in the wake of the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in 1963.

As others have pointed out, the USA probably hasn't the budget for this sort of stuff. In addition, Dubya and his advisers are reportedly not very interested in space exploration; it's something they're prepared to spend money on from time time to keep the scientist happy, but no farther.

[elimloth.livejournal.com]

Political attention redirection notwithstanding, going to the moon to get to mars is a wretched idea and a tremendous waste of capital. It is the equivalent of travelling from Seattle to New York via Murdo station in Antarctica.

Mars direct is the way:

http://www.nw.net/mars/
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00087E38-5B46-1C75-9B81809EC588EF21

[codepope.livejournal.com]

And the President gives NASA turkey.

The Bush moon mission/mars mission is a lie. They trial balloned this in December and waited for Spirit to land safely before saying anything.

The entire plan is based around gutting NASA. NASA will be given two missions, moon and mars. Any project that is not directly connected to those missions will be canned.

Then, we fully expect the money to vapourise in 2005, same as it did on Medicare, with the justification being "the deficit".

One was actually hoping NASA could keep their head down during Bush's screwing of the US economy, but apparently Karl Rove thinks it should attract to soccer moms.

What this means is.... look to China/India/Japan to get established on the moon first.