New Mars Forums

In Many of the discusions of topics we come back to what did the president mean by first the Moon and then beyound. To use the moon as a stepping stone to space.

To sustain a Moon project does this mean a base, colonization and or can it be one shot after the other with nothing permanent ever built.

We can keep looking a startup cost as well as the long term cost but are they really what is important to exploration.

If we go to the moon should we be looking to develope self sufficiency and less dependence on Earths resources.

Should the moon be the next Launching pad to beyound?

The questions keep coming or going and even Nasa is looking for information as to what is meant in the commissions report.

We talk a lot about what Nasa could be doing and then we find out that Nasa is doing a lot of unrelated Space activities.

NASA sets stage for personal aircraft
Flying-car dreams could spawn new type of vehicle

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5750922/

Nasa definitely needs to be stream lined for space activites only.

It is rocket science
Resident helps NASA solve space travel troubles
 
http://www.zwire.com/site....1&rfi=9

The SCSU students are participating in research to help NASA minimize the negative effects of prolonged weightlessness on human bones.
NASA's land-based and space studies already show that bone loss varies greatly from astronaut to astronaut. Some experience little-to-no loss, while others experience significant bone loss

Going to the moon to practice yes is very different as compared to Mars at least it has an atmosphere.

Soil type on the moon versus Mars are not even of simular mineral oxides. I do not see much research on the moon leading to any developed items for Mars.

The moon has its own unique research reasons for going back to it. One is simply to finish where we left off in our search for knowledge on planet formation.

As for on the billing side of the budget unless Nasa learns how to lower the cost of doing space they stand to lose a lot more than there budgets.

Actually we have lived off the land for centuries but those were of liveable condition. We have lost much of what is instictive survival skills to be redeveloped again for the Moon or for the Mars current environments. That is partly why the analogous site for the Mars society are in the romote regions of Earth. Taking advantage of the near Mars climates, soils, lack of water trying to simulate hostile atmospheric conditions by forcibly using space suits, sealed habitats and near rover transportation style vehicles

Most design work and workers usually do not care about cost of parts or of labor to make items. There usual goal is to just make it work and that it is someone elses problem for cost. The only way to change that mind set is to reduce the available design funds. Forcing the designers to finally give a care.

The last half of this page of response postings at  http://www.newmars.com/cgi-bin/ikonboar … 260;st=165
have really been dealing with Iss cutbacks under the Hubble Mistake action needed topic. My response is the same from here down.

But in response to why other vehicle that could lift modules or nodes to the iss for install.
First you have the shuttle arm used to place into location for attachment to the Iss.
second is that each module was not designed to take the pressures of launch to orbit on the hulls or outer shell.

Designing a new shell to take these forces would probably weigh more than each module and still there would be the need for how to remove from protective casing once in orbit with the ISS and what to do with the casing as well.

I too have longed for a chance to get into space but little or none of a chance since I am not rich, powerful and nor am I member of the working Nasa clan.
But the only reason to care at all about find any form of life is to know if it would be harmful to human life.

Also any more recently introduced lifes from Earth may have hitched rides aboard ours and other nations probes of the past 30 years plus.

While not being a 100% on target with this topic it does have some details of interest.
Next-gen rover to practice searching for life
Researchers prepare Zoë for test in Chilean desert
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5725501/

• Aug. 17, 2004 | 6 p.m. ET
Space-race updates on the World Wide Web:
• Flight International: Could SpaceShipOne go orbital?
http://www.flightinternational.com/fi_issu....ode=106
• X Prize Foundation: Argentine rocketeers test escape tower
http://www.xprize.com/press_r....0040813
• Masten Space Systems: New entrant in suborbital market
http://masten-space.com/
• The Guardian: Space travel goes sailing
http://www.guardian.co.uk/space/article … 27,00.html

• Aug. 17, 2004 | 6 p.m. ET
Space-race updates on the World Wide Web:
• Flight International: Could SpaceShipOne go orbital?
http://www.flightinternational.com/fi_issu....ode=106
• X Prize Foundation: Argentine rocketeers test escape tower
http://www.xprize.com/press_r....0040813
• Masten Space Systems: New entrant in suborbital market
http://masten-space.com/
• The Guardian: Space travel goes sailing
http://www.guardian.co.uk/space/article … 27,00.html

More on the other topic of is hubble a mistake action needed.
spacedaily article link on that page.
http://www.newmars.com/cgi-bin....ntry172