New Mars Forums

lol on the pun 

But if LCROSS is suffessful then water ice will be confirmed which is 99% of the reason for shooting a lander into the dark.

Looks like it's on the ball: NASA Performs Drop Tests

No BS-spacewatch-rumor this time!

Looks like a promising workspace.  Its definetely more spacious than Soyuz or Apollo - dunno how it compares with the shuttle but not bad.

I think for a Martian expedition a larger module would be wise - my thoughts are toward something like a Mars Direct Hab Lander, but for an orbital or lunar mission the CEV (and LSAM) should be more than sufficent.

Eww.  I understand recycling but that's pretty unhygenic.  Personally any waste whether from astronauts or algae needs to be broken down into something...less disgusting to be frank.  I imagine the right blend of bacteria might make such a compost pile...or septic tank...into a halfway decent methane plant.

A lunar telescope of that size I'd welcome just as openly too, but from blogs and news quotes I've ready just as many people are advocating orbital is optimal...for space telescopes.  I think the division between lunar v.s. orbital telescopes have two merits/flaws:

Orbital: More mass can be devoted directly to the instrument, no landing equiptment no multiple launches.

Lunar: As part of the Lunar Program continual manned servicing possible (which has aided the Hubble through its years whereas [particularly infrared sats. with a finite cryogentic storage] one-shot unserviceable sats. have lifespans cut short by their electronics and fuel).  If the polar sites utilized a constant temperature can be kept (again infrared telescopes).

I dunno if JIMO could be revived, but the Ares V could easily launch a craft with double Cassini's mass to Jupiter or Saturn, solving the subsurface mysteries of Enceladus and Europa.  A Martian expidition (while likely a cargo mission for a proceeding a manned one) could send a suite of probes like the Pioneer Venus multiprobe but on steroids.

Such expiditions may cost more, but ambitious missions often yield unprescedented findings; Hubble, Voyagers, Vikings - they all proved their worth and with the Titan IV out of commission and the meager ELVs barely up to the challenge...whatcha gonna launch on?  8)

I think it'd be fair, if not safe to say, that after developing the Ares V and havng the HVL capacity rocket scientists have been begging for it'd be obvious to apply it toward at least any BIG space projects.

In the case of the Saturn V (althought not the best example since it was a matter of using up spare parts) it heaved up the whole Skylab.  How much mass did Skylab have compared to the present ISS or even the fully assembled one?

To me its just a matter of applying the right rocket to the right job.  Delta IIs are obvious for small Discover-class probes and LEO satellites, Atlas V for larger craft or out-bound New Horizon-esque craft.  I think, of the two, the Ares I probably would have better applications than the Ares V...economically that is.  It's a smaller, simpiler rocket, no strap-ons.  Just exchange the Orion for a composite shroud - the only element that'd question the cost would be recovering the lower stage if anything.  Something huge like the V ought to only be used for a large custom mission - something akin to Hubble, a space station, or a Lunar-Martian expidition.

I don't think a rocket with the Ares' capability ought to be exclusive.  That sound reasonable enough?

More intruige, from the ESA Mars Express page: Mars Express radar gauges water quantity around Mars’ south pole

If the South Pole, that's typically been considered nothing more than a patch of dry ice, has possible evidence of liquid water (coupled of course with a massive amount of water ice) imagine what findings are awaiting at the Martian North Pole that is mainly water ice!

As long as the Russians keep it peaceful I don't have any arguments against a joint ESA/Russia launch site.

However, I imagine if Russia somehow weasles in an Iranian launch from that site Congress will raise hell over it - I do not know how Europe would react but, obviously, for it to happn ESA would have to agree to allow it.

Oh definetely - feels like something out of 2010 even.

Its not often we get to see spacecraft imagery like this save of the space shuttle/ISS, Apollo, or the various Mars landers.

I hope little Philiae will be able to give us some information on Mars.

Microwave transmission.  It has been tested in the past via sets of Japanese satellites.  Aforementioned mountain set on the high ground out to have great line-of-site transmission.

Silly GCN...tricks are for kids. 

I think the trouble the space/earth sciences are facing right now isn't due to the Constellation program; its due to the fact that both the STS and CEV are being run simultainiously.  That, as its already made itself clear, is gonna put enough of a huge strain on NASA, and since Congress is pinchy on its purses something has to give since neither professional engineers nor the likes of us space enthusiasts want either to go.

All that can be done is just wait for the space shuttle to retire.  At that point budget stresses will finally be relieved and the sciences will be free to romp around as before.  Better still, with a lunar program underway this'll give the space sciences more opportunity - for instance solar science is dependent on getting beyond the Earth's magnetic field and VanAllen belts to taste the solar wind.  Orion would give such instruments a free ride into the kind of enviorment you rarely get with Earthly satellites - aside from the Lagrange points between Earth and Sol the Moon (or Lunar orbit as well) is the next best spot for their job.  I certainly wouldn't mind a Hubble 2 placed in one of the Lunar Lagrange points with the possibility of servicing from Orion perhaps every other year.

Sounds an aweful lot like the dogma that kept us limited to LEO and the STS...

If we can't handle the Moon what makes you think we can handle an asteroid, although I won't deny the negligible gravity would be useful but their unsteady rotations atrocious?

The Moon is pretty much a "space-for-retards'" guide.  Close proximity, no atmosphere to burden spacecraft descent, and still unexplored and underestimated.