Nasa plans permanent base on Moon for 2024

      Home » Science & Technology » Nasa plans permanent base on Moon for 2024

Nasa plans permanent base on Moon for 2024

NASA's deputy administrator Shana Dale has made the declaration early this week.

... Quote:


WASHINGTON, Dec. 4 — NASA announced plans on Monday for a permanent base on the Moon, to be started soon after astronauts return there around 2020.

The agency’s deputy administrator, Shana Dale, said the United States would develop rockets and spacecraft to get people to the Moon and establish a rudimentary base. There, other countries and commercial enterprises could expand the outpost to develop scientific and other interests, Ms. Dale said.

Ms. Dale and other officials of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration said the agency envisioned a base at one of the lunar poles, to take advantage of the near-constant sunlight for solar power generation. It would have an “open architecture” design to which others could add the capabilities they want.

Scott Horowitz, NASA’s associate administrator for exploration, said crews of four astronauts would make weeklong missions to the Moon starting around 2020.

As more equipment was set up, human stays would eventually grow to 180 days, and become permanent by 2024. By 2027, officials said, a pressurized roving vehicle on the surface would take people on expeditions far from the base.

NASA gave no cost estimate for the program and no design details for the base. Ms. Dale said all plans assumed that the agency would continue operating from a fixed budget of about $17 billion a year.
The New York Times

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/12/05/science/05submoon_lg.gif

This is the kind of thing that NASA should have started doing in the 90's. This time NASA has got its concept right, no longer is it going to sit on its high horse of science. It has now come to terms that space is only viable when the money comes along with you too and that is exactly what they plane on doing this time. Low cost, safe and profitable enterprise. Also something new this time is that they actively want other countries to come with them, together. Unlike with the International Space Station, now they aren’t arrogant about letting the other nations in on it. The hard learnt lessons of the space station and fickle government support has sunk into their heads!

If this is to be a reality, it will be one of the great events of humankind and we will hopefully be there to see it happen. Our grandparents witnessed WW1 and WW2, our parents the first man on the moon and we may witness a day when man lives on the moon! I think on the grand scale of things we have come far.

It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "Fly me to the moon" :dbguy
By IAF: posted on 6-12-2006

We have an extremely difficult time send off a shuttle and getting it back in one piece, we're losing shuttles due to a styrofoam type substance, yet people still think we can go to the moon and put a station down in less than 20 years???

Personally, I'm all for scrapping the Shuttle, selling the computers at NASA, and spending the money on something that we would actually benefit from, like.. a cure for cancer, or a cure for the common cold. Hell, I'd settle for a cure for the common hangover...

And people often wonder why I say the world is screwed beyond correction...
By Terry: posted on 6-12-2006

This is what NASA's administrators forsee for thier organisation and that is what they plan. It was possible to acheive this since the 80's but the only thing that was deficient was the will to go ahead with such an endevour.

The shuttle outlived its intended lifetime manytimes over. From an engineering standpoint they are a sucess but now the requirements have changed. No longer do we need to showboat to the USSR and the government is stripping NASA of its bulk, thus the scrapping of the shuttle. 3 decades + service is more than any car could ever do and the space shuttle is 100 thousand times more complex.

Also It isnt styrofoam!! :o Its refractory foam, used as an ablative substance!!
And yes its quite possible to set up a base in 20 years or less as all the technology already exsists today to do so. The science is there, the ability is there, what they need is the money and the will.
By IAF: posted on 6-12-2006

I read somewhere that the person who took over NASA to close down the space program was so effective, he even destroyed any plans, and working equipment that they had there.

According to the scientists they could have wound back the program to maybe only one launch a year, and have a running moonbase by now with little expenditure.

Its the complete stop in manned space exploration and the destruction of the Satern V rockets at the time that led to the expenses that have had to be carried now.
By netchicken: posted on 6-12-2006

It is VERY useless. There is nothing to be gained from trying to go to the moon. And, to be honest, there was nothing to be gained in going the first time. Winning a "Space Race" does nothing to make the world better, nor does it serve a purpose to humans. It was just a great way to take money, claim it was all spent, then pocket what was "left over" and the citizens would be none the wiser.

Stryofoam, refractory foam, call it what you like. IT FAILED... You could call it Sooper Dooper Multi-Purpose Poly Saturated Self Sealing Magic Foam, it still failed. It may as well have been styrofoam, because it fuctioned a lot like I'd expect styrofoam to!!!!

The construction of a space station, or even another mission, manned or un-manned is a waste of money any way you say it. There are lots of ways to spend money that will actually benefit the common public than to waste it trying to launch another shuttle that will fall out of the sky because of a poorly built craft.
By Terry: posted on 7-12-2006

This sounds like famous last words.... we have no idea just what the technology or the scientific devvelopment from this will lead to, and to stop such exploration merely because it doesn't seem directly "useful" puts a stop in development.

Thats what happened to NASA immediatly after the last apollo mission, and all you got was 30 years of nothing.

We stop exploration to our own detriment.

Its like comments like this... :)

"Who the h*** wants to hear actors talk?" -- H.M. Warner, Warner Brothers, 1927

"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." -- Western Union internal memo, 1876.

"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?" -- David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.

"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value." -- Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre.


 http://web.mit.edu/randy/ww...
By netchicken: posted on 7-12-2006

Sez who?
The cost of Magellens voyage around the world was so great it bankrupted Spains economy. All great endevours involve great sacrifice.

I bet there were people telling Columbus "What sort of moron are you spending all our money to look for another travel route".

Great endevours can lead to great payoffs at great costs.

Humanity has conquered the earth, we are over it like fleas on a dog. Now its time to move out. Sure you can't run away from trouble. The first settlers in America ran away from trouble in their own land, and most died terrible deaths in their new country.

Life is more than just existing, the countries of the old world didn't fix their problems before they sent out explorers, you still need to reach out.
By netchicken: posted on 7-12-2006

Atlantis is eaither a myth or a bunch of rocks and ruins. It holds no relevence or interest outside of the 15 minutes of fame it will gain if even found.

Big deal.

England at its finest still had people dying of curable diseases in London, yet they didn't stop exploring, nor did other countries.

I am sure many people alive at the time of Magellen and Columbus complained about the waste of money it cost to send them on their way. Funny those people are not recorded in history.
By netchicken: posted on 7-12-2006

This has always been an issue for the space community. They are cast aside as wishfull thinkers, yet most people know little how the space travel has changed the world we live in today.

Take velcrow for example, developed for astronauts is now something that has changed our world. The same goes for Sattelites and telecommunication which has has yet again revolutionsied the world. There have been leaps and bounds in the understanding of the scientific community due to knowledge and date gathered through space exploration, from Skylab to the Hubble to the international space station.

The other foolish idea that is prevelant in the peoples minds is that if we stopped space exploration and spent the money elsewhere we could solve all the worlds problems. Money does not equall answers, innovation does and innovation is inspired through all round technological development. Space exploration has made faster communication technology possible which inturn has led to faster computational ability which has led to faster communications etc. By closing our doors to exploration we shut ourselves out from the process of leaning from our surroundings. The different processes and complexity of the universe around us has always inpsired revolutionary concepts that have changed our understanding for ever. Discontinuing this is at humanity's peril.
By IAF: posted on 8-12-2006

Innovation alone is as worthless as space travel; there MUST be some funding to put the ideas in motion. Had it not been for the money to purchase the materials needed, our modern conveniences would have found their way onto comic books and gone no further.

I'll agree totally with the statement of space travel making the world a better place. Had it not been for space travel, young kids would have to learn to tie their shoes instead of just learning to operate Velcro...

I agree that space travel has made for faster communication. However, I fail to see how dumping billions of dollars onto a uninhabited planet is going to effect us in any other way than to further deplete funding.

Yes, not traveling to the far reaching corners of the universe is shutting us out from the opportunity to venture to other planets, however, I also see that since it is extremely expensive to send a crew of less than 10 people, how many hundreds of years of this crap are we going to have to fund before more than just Astronauts can go?? 100 years? 350? When will a couple be to go to the moon on their honeymoon? The odds are worse than none; too expensive, and too impractical.

I'm all for the statement of "nothing ventured, nothing gained", however, before money is dumped into a venture, it'd be nice to know what we stand to gain. With manned space travel, there is no gain that I can see. I've already mastered tying my shoes, so an easier operating velcro isn't going to benefit me...

Humanity succeeded for thousands of years before people even knew the world wasn't flat; I'd think staying on Terra Firma for a few more years, or for the remaining time left in the world, wouldn't hurt anything.
By Terry: posted on 9-12-2006








Nasa plans permanent base on Moon for 2024 | [Login ]
Powered by XMB
Privacy Policy