You are not logged in.
Here is the news release by Nasa:
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2004/se … drill.html
Mars-Arctic Drill Test Run Images
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/news/marsdrill.html
Mars Drill to Seek Knowledge, Resources
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/prepar … drill.html
None of the resources seem to answer the depth question but the photos would indicate some means based on the pole or drill images.
I have been thinking about the old apollo lunar mission and reviewing that hardware.
Basically we had two ships in one launch, cargo equipment plus lunar buggy, supplies, and of course the two parts one that brought us to the moon and back, the other from lunar orbit to the surface and back to lunar orbit. Some would on the mars direct plan feel that seperating these functions into two distinct vehicles for use one launched ahead of the other is the approach to take.
If that were the case put a capsule on a delta for the manned version and use the normal one for the unmanned cargo hauler.. This is not to bad of a trade off if both vehicles use as much common material as possible until you find out that they probably when you factor in the heavy lift making the unmanned vehicle much larger than the maned one. Which then leads to different launch pads for each most likely.
So it would be better to share the rolls of shape as well to help control costs, such that you balance the vehicles structure for both uses. Also if the cargo unit can also land on the lunar surface it then can double as extra habitat or for other uses once empty.
Yup you are right also what version also seems to be a problem as well for quicktime.
You might try this in the latest real player osome other movie player.
Granted a little dated but may be also true for mars since methane is present.
Electric shock creates organic molecule? Is it an acidy moon, until probes are sent to land on the ice or to scoop though the atmosphere we will be unable to answer those questions.
Quote from cnn article:
Immense red freckles on Jupiter's moon Europa could serve as geologic elevators, possibly transporting microbial life from a subterranean ocean to the icy surface, according to space scientists.
Might this also explain the red spot on jupiter itself?
Edit:
I am still poking on the search for water on other moons and the possibility of life. Have found that jupiter has three moons that fit that bill; Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto. Each seem to show very simular life search results.
'Shocking' discovery boosts chance of life on Europa
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993421
Life could be tough on acid Europa
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994664
Jupiter moon like giant 'lava lamp'
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/11/01/europa.spots/
Destroying microbe life if found may also destroy the chance to answer the question of how life begins as well no matter where it is found and also does it form in the same amino acid format.
Well it seems like space flight just got a little cheaper than the days of old where you could take a ride to the ISS aboard a soyuz for 20 million, now a days you can get a 0G ride for around the 2000 dollars and with the up and coming suborbital 5 passenger it will be around the 200 thousand. Pushing space flight tourism is as it would seem to be lowering prices for all. With the possible next orbital xprize on the horizon who knows what it will actually cost but I am all for it, the sooner the better.
Space is no longer just about fear of the cold wars, curiosity, profit or of science it now is the possible realm of conlonization and exspansion of mans presence thoughout or solar system someday.
Today SpaceShipOne has taken the first step into space and will soon make its second in order to capture the prize. But it now also has another backer in that they are moving forward with suborbital toursit plans for the future on a next generation design.
The xprise competitors that are in the process of building ships should still even after the prize has been won not stop. They should continue on to keep the race to orbit going and hopefully of plans beyound...
Are past project failures and even current on going use of the shuttle and of the ISS completion really so bad as the Senate feels?
Quote:
The silver lining in the Senate Appropriations Committee's boost in NASA's budget is the cut in funding for the international space station, an ongoing project that proves there are indeed black holes in space — fiscal black holes.
NASA's black hole
http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/200409 … -3836r.htm
Thanks for the links I also noted that it mentions the steerable parachute technology, Reusable and possible use for a small amount of cargo or for a 4 person crew transport.
Link to the old apollo program LM
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/apollolm.htm
I believe we only stayed on the moon for a few days in it, but what would it take to make one for a crew of six to stay a month?
We must find a way to ensure that future missions can be done in a reasonable time frame for development and that they have a degree of compatibility of equipment between missions so reducing costs allowing more missions.
Of course the other way is to send equipment that will make what is needed on the Moon or to send machines that can be reused again and again to reduce costs.
Reducing mission cost, rocket costs and anything associated to the exploration process is a must.
So what does a lunar robotic exploration probe have in common with a manned vehicle part compatibilty in order to reduce component developement costs, not much...
Sending equipment to a site of exploration interest, is a must if you can use what is there for free with that equipment to lower costs.
This will also stir up debate and maybe answer the size question on whether it should stay designated as a planet.
10 years is a very long journey for those scienctist connected with the project.
Martian Republic you note that there is a need for a lunar shuttle and more from Earth orbit.
I started this topic: Earth Re-entry, Moon or Mars Lander and
return vehicle. One do all, part of CEV?
In hopes of thoughts for and by others on a more universal design. That would be capable of all landings or launch requirements from the moon to lunar orbit and Earth re-entry as well as for future Mars use that would be reusable.
As an American who was part of those that saw the flags and foot prints. I myself do not want to see repeat of what was done but to see the next step in the continual process towards a manned base on the moon. I also do not feel it needs to take decades to get to that point as well.
Question for CEV, Can one vehicle design do all or must we have different vehicles for all or could we plan for the future use that it may be put to in order to make a universal unit.
Yes that is what and why I made note of it in my opening line.
A universal lander, re-entry vehicle and moon, mars to orbit return vehicle, reusuable design from the get go. Rather than a single vehicle design for each seperate item, which I feel is very costly since they would most likely not be design for reusablity.
It will take me a while to read though all of the comments by RobertDyck, RobS, and Martian Republic for you have written some very complete analysis of the issues.
On the row boat analogy to cross the Pacific if multiple row boats are tethered together not only do they strengthen each other but they also make the larger vesel that is required. Add a few more planks and lashing to allow for greater flexibility plus more supplies for safety.
That is why I guess that I am in favor of linking multiple ships together in LEO as the means to go to Mars, rather than sending each seperately. Each ship in the cluster can still be a dedicated purpose vehicle but launch from orbit to the destination together.
Something like the Roton and a few other such designs.
It would appear from afar that the Earths bluish appearance has a dark spot on its face.
Rather than going after those that think they might be contributing to a good charity, go after the charity instead to find out why they are channeling the funds to these other activities and or organizations instead.
Full speed ahead with developement and Nasa will buy because it is cheaper than all others that have said they could do it as well.
What you might call the flags and foot prints phase of the moon exploration was just that, not much was done for the science dollars. But most of that in hindsight is not the fault of the missions but what was to be done with the knowledge gained.
The next logical step should have been to stay longer, to dig below the outer crust, to make caverns and to mine the below, to continue to search the mystery of the moons being or becoming...
I hope that I was not the only one to see this article on India's rocketry plans.
I feel that as each nation progresses towards missions to the moon manned or otherwise it means that Nasa must also consider the same if it does not want to be left behind in there dust.
India's Unmanned Moon Mission Going Smoothly: Official
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/india-04p.html
It is just usually that the argument is used to send probes to explore only and to leave man out of the exploration equation all together.
I do agree that we should always tread lightly until we do know what it is to allow safe man interaction with the environment and a precaution to protect man as well.
Life is always one of those early trump cards that will always be played within the frame work of exploration to denigh human interaction no matter what form the essence of life shall take.
As to getting the materials needed to fatten up the mars atmosphere or to make it more econmical to support colonize on mars. Mining operations of the moon, by heating upper atmosphers and syphoning of any planet atmosphere can also gain the needed chemicals.
Yes distance is a factor but so is the amount to be returned by the ton or other wise, for the amount of cash out lay to make it practical.
More links:
UK's Branson to Launch Space Tourism in 2007
http://www.reuters.com/newsArt....6341611
snipet:
The flights will climb to about 130 kilometers, roughly six times higher than regular commercial planes, and include four minutes of weightlessness, views of the horizon from 1,200 miles away and possibly a gin and tonic if granted a liquor license.
edit
found another:
Virgin Galactic: The logical next step
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3693518.stm