Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 94 posts

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#61

Post by dnautics »

Beltiras wrote: post #60
mLuby wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not in the industry, but I'd guess in the short term there are two options: - scientific orgs (NASA, universities, etc); I get they'd love to pay for access to lunar surface. Maybe even some imaging from the dark side of the Moon? - prospecting companies like Deep Space Industries or Planetary Resources.

I know what people mean when they say "dark side of the moon" but it always bothers me. There is no "dark side" to the moon. The picture that got stuck in my head was seeing the moon transit the earth: http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2015/08/21/4296866.ht... Beautiful picture.

Its the side of the Moon that's dark when it faces the earth?

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#62

Post by Beltiras »

dnautics wrote: post #61
Beltiras wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what people mean when they say "dark side of the moon" but it always bothers me. There is no "dark side" to the moon. The picture that got stuck in my head was seeing the moon transit the earth: http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2015/08/21/4296866.ht... Beautiful picture.

Its the side of the Moon that's dark when it faces the earth?

When people say "dark side of the moon" they are almost exclusively speaking about the side that faces away from Earth.

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#63

Post by CapitalistCartr »

jostmey wrote: post #10
CapitalistCartr wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always thought someone would put a tiny rover, perhaps a couple of kg, there and make it work. Using non-space-rated electronics, and making it up on the shielding is pretty risky, not NASA style but I figured for sure someone would roll the dice.

If you were going to spend the enormous amount of money required to send something to the moon, you'd probably use space-rated electronics. I'm guessing the electronics make up a minuscule fraction of the cost, so why risk a super expensive mission to save a relatively small amount of money?

Not money; weight and time. Working with off-the-shelf components is much faster, and usually weighs less. Shielding is basically fancy foil; it weighs precious little. I used to wrap components in the Air Force and the rule was don't exceed three layers when touching it up.

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#64

Post by skgoa »

starik36 wrote: post #57
osense wrote: post #53

Since there seem to be some people from the industry around, I’d like to ask: how are we doing with writing software for such safety-critical systems? Do we still use C and try to have it statically verified by various tools? Write the software multiple times and have instances of the functionally same systems running in parallel, Andy see if they agree on which action should be taken? Can dependent and/or linear typ…

I interviewed at SpaceX and asked them what they use to write code that runs in the rocket. It's all plain C and everything must be declared before hand - in other words, there are no dynamic allocations anywhere in the code.

This is typical for embedded software in cars, planes etc. Most of that C code will be generated though.

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#65

Post by Zenka »

Beltiras wrote: post #60
mLuby wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not in the industry, but I'd guess in the short term there are two options: - scientific orgs (NASA, universities, etc); I get they'd love to pay for access to lunar surface. Maybe even some imaging from the dark side of the Moon? - prospecting companies like Deep Space Industries or Planetary Resources.

I know what people mean when they say "dark side of the moon" but it always bothers me. There is no "dark side" to the moon. The picture that got stuck in my head was seeing the moon transit the earth: http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2015/08/21/4296866.ht... Beautiful picture.

Isn't it the dark side of the moon, since spacecraft passing behind the moon go 'dark'; out of radio contact since the moon blocks radio signals?

On the other hand: it's the side of the moon that never receives earthshine. So it's dark in that sense.

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#66

Post by ben_w »

elif wrote: post #50
mLuby wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These prizes should be left to automatically compound interest/investment until they're claimed.

True, that would strengthen the business case for participants in subsequent competitions.

Disagree. What’s the management cliché? SMART goals — Specific, Measurable, Attainable/Assignable, Relevant/Realistic, Time-bound.

Without a time constraint, most people[citation needed] keep putting things off until later.

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#67

Post by supervillain »

Instead of going to the Moon, why not just create a self-sustaining vehicle that can allow humans to survive sustainably in any terrain, desert, forests, mountains, land, sea, lake or water. On soil, above or underwater.

And make it a race prize competition similar to Google Lunar X Prize Race.

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#69

Post by pbhjpbhj »

robin_reala wrote: post #54
alexnewman wrote: post #19

Just in time for the falcon heavy. The first rocket i can remember where I can go to website and pay for a lunar transfer

Space Adventures have been advertising a lunar mission for a decade or so on Soyuz, they just needed two people willing to split the cost. http://www.spaceadventures.com/experiences/circumlunar-missi...

The cost given is ~"it depends, contact us" (ie they don't give a cost).

Re: The Google Lunar X Prize’s Race to the Moon Is Over. Nobody Won

#70

Post by gadders »

jk4930 wrote: post #43
greenhouse_gas wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just curious (not a competitor :), what business model is there in placing micro-sats on the moon?

Considering that there's little time left, your payload (and business model) has severe constraints. Unless you have something pre-developed and nearly ready to launch (e.g. at a university), aim for something simple. That leaves you mostly with media attention (sponsors), technology demos (e.g. for third parties), paraphernalia/vanity items that wealthy individuals or communities pay for (no remains or religious art…

>>(no remains or religious artifacts please)

I can imagine some rich people would find it pretty cool to have an urn of their ashes left on the moon.

Post reply on HN