Debug: Database connection successful
You are not logged in.
Eventually NASA will have to select sites for planetary bases as the VSE advances and both scientists and engineers press for off-Earth sites of operation.
Feel free to suggest where would be ideal locations for sites of human settlement on either Mars or Luna. Try to cite merits on accessibility from orbit, resource potential, science potential, safety, and anything else that'd merit considering such a locale for a human base.
I'll make the first suggestions of course.
For Luna: Since water is scarce the lunar poles are likely candidates. I will be more specific and say de Gerlache crater in the South Pole-Aitken basin. It itself is one of the craters believed to hold polar ice. The basin as a whole due to its depth into the crust offers great potential for lunar geological science and even sampling the lunar mantle. Resource extraction including ice (if cornfirmed naturally), metals, and LOX are possible so for creating a self-sustaining lunar colony it's prime relstate. The down sides are the terrain, which is cratered, and the extreme southerly position imposing orbital maneuvering.
For Mars: Kasei Vallis is the planet's most impressive channel system on the planet, and even if it was a short-lived mass flood it lead from the northern basins almost directly into Mariner Valley itself - if you want research on ancient hydrological cycles you can hardly get better or finding sites for Martian fossils. It is also adjacent to numerous locales: to the East Chryse where Viking 1 sits, to the South the glory of Mariner Valley with the network of the Layberinth of the Night to the Southwest, and to the West not just Olympus or even the Tharsis Mons but numerous volcanoes.
Offline
Like button can go here
I am not sure we know enough about either body to make definitive suggestions. If the lunar poles have ice and the ice is recoverable in an economic way, they are the logical place. Some evidence suggests the north pole has more ice than the south, so we have to wait and see about that. If we find a nickel-iron meteorite with high concentrations of platinum group metals, even if it is on the equator, and if it can be exploited economically, it will be the obvious location.
As for Mars, we need to know where the subsurface ice is; if there is an equatorial location siting on ice with only a thin veneer of cover, that's the place to go. Also, if there is a thermal area (none have been found yet) it may be a prime base location because of the potential power supply.We also don't know enough about landing technology; if landing can be made with great precision, a narrow and dramatic valley would be fine, but otherwise safety may demand a base on a big, flat, boring plain.
-- RobS
Offline
Like button can go here
It will come down to compromise in what is the best spot for an intial base. In the case of the Moon we have the poles which may well not only have access to ice or similar as well as the potential for constant access to solar power (Mountains under constant sunlight). The disadvantage is that it is harder to get to the poles and of course there is the lack of "flatter" spaces. The Equator is the best place for ease of access but will be in the dark for 50% of the time.
So a lot will depend on what we find and what we use to find it. We need to discover a place where we can deliver multiple loads of cargo and do it routinely that is also close to mineral deposits that we can use to provide air and building materials to experiment on.
Chan eil mi aig a bheil ùidh ann an gleidheadh an status quo; Tha mi airson cur às e.
Offline
Like button can go here
As for Mars, we need to know where the subsurface ice is;
http://www.newmars.com/wiki/index.php/Water_on_Mars
Offline
Like button can go here
Moon is obvious.. peaks of ethernal light.. you get constant sun, easy access to water if there is any in cold traps..
Mars will probably be around equator.. near the easy to reach subsurface ice (permafrost) and interesting places to explore..
Offline
Like button can go here