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

The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 73 posts

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#51

Post by [deleted] »

olivaw_daneel wrote: post #25
WalterBright wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of being on the moon is having it as a massive manufacturing place for building things to move outward in the solar system. Lifting things out of the earth's gravity well is just too expensive. Compare the size of the Saturn 5 rocket to get to the moon with the size of the rocket needed to come back. I do not see the challenges of building a habitat on the moon that much different from Mars. You have (ess…

The purpose of being on the moon is having it as a massive manufacturing place for building things to move outward in the solar system. Lifting things out of the earth's gravity well is just too expensive. The cost of shipping factories (and many raw materials) in pieces from the Earth to the Moon and then assembling them there should certainly outweigh just building and launching from Earth, especially as private co…

[deleted]

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#52

Post by jgalt212 »

WalterBright wrote: post #12

The foreseeable future for man in space is the moon, not Mars. The moon is close - orders of magnitude easier to get there and back again. Its gravity well isn't a prison. You can probably launch stuff from there to earth with a linear accelerator. It's full of natural resources that can be used to build colonies and space ships. There's no environment to degrade. Mars doesn't make any sense. The moon does. And besid…

> Mars doesn't make any sense. The moon does.

I agree, except for the fact that the moon has already been done, and Mars has not. That being said Mars would be a colossal waste of money, robbing resources from real science that is currently getting done in space. If you think the James Webb telescope stymied other scientific efforts, just wait until the US goes all in on Mars.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/science/nasa-webb-space-t...

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#53

Post by JoeDaDude »

reed1 wrote: post #35

Ok I'm a complete idiot on astronomics. Seeing how difficult it is to land on moon even with recent technology and such, also keeping in mind that no manned moon landings was made on 21st century, can we say that Neil Armstrong landing was a fraud?

See the response from Patrick Germain on Quora. After reading it, it all makes sense...

https://www.quora.com/Even-when-proof-exists-that-the-moon-l...

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#54

Post by [deleted] »

baq wrote: post #44
andyfal12 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100 percent agree. The most logical plan I heard was the following: Solar power works way better, and potentially nonstop at the poles of the moon. Use that energy to cook moonrock into building materials and lauch it all into orbit on an electromagnetic mass driver. Then design and build Oniell cylinders, once we have rigorous tests of artificial gravity on humans. If you want a Mars base after the fact, go for it.…

> The most logical plan I heard was the following: Solar power works way better, and potentially nonstop at the poles of the moon. the problem is, unless you're at the pole, you have 2 weeks of power followed by 2 weeks of pitch black darkness, so you have to have a lot of batteries or the station isn't livable 50% of the time.

[deleted]

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#55

Post by Symmetry »

WalterBright wrote: post #12

The foreseeable future for man in space is the moon, not Mars. The moon is close - orders of magnitude easier to get there and back again. Its gravity well isn't a prison. You can probably launch stuff from there to earth with a linear accelerator. It's full of natural resources that can be used to build colonies and space ships. There's no environment to degrade. Mars doesn't make any sense. The moon does. And besid…

There are advantages and disadvantages. Closeness is a big issue, I'll grant you that. Robots on the Moon's surface can get quick guidance form humans on Earth much more quickly than robots on Mars. And if something goes wrong you can get home more quickly.

The gravity well difference is a thing but isn't straightforward. You need twice as much delta-v to take off from Mars as from the Moon (3800 m/s versus 1730 m/s). But on the other hand Mars has an atmosphere and while it isn't think enough for you to touch down gently with a big mass you'll only need 200 m/s or so to cushion your landing. But you need heat shields on Mars, but you need those to get back to Earth too. But lack of atmosphere means you could maybe use a mass driver to help take off from the Moon.

Mars has a gravity that's 2/5 of Earth's while the Moon's is 1/6. Is that important for human health? We have no frigging clue since the budget for a centrifuge on the ISS was cut.

The Moon rotates once every month and Mars once every 24 hours. If you're using solar panels it's a big deal making it though the lunar night, you'll need lots of batteries, maybe 25 times the weight of your panels. On Mars you need maybe the weight of your panels in batteries. There are the Peaks of Eternal Light on the south pole of the moon where this isn't an issue and you can just keep pointing your solar panels at different parts of the horizon all month.

And finally the martian atmosphere provides some protection against radiation and small meteors. It's not a super friendly environment in either case with no magnetic field so you'll probably be spending a lot of time under ground in either location.

So, it's complicated and I'm not willing to say that one is the true path and the other is stupid.

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#56

Post by skybrian »

moemoeg wrote: post #38
curtis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mars has some stuff that the Moon doesn't: volatiles. According to Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volatiles ): In planetary science, volatiles are the group of chemical elements and chemical compounds with low boiling points that are associated with a planet's or moon's crust or atmosphere. Examples include nitrogen, water, carbon dioxide, ammonia, hydrogen, methane and sulfur dioxide. Of these the only on…

One thing worth noting is the soil, if memory serves, the moon soil hs been described as being very sharp and clingy with some properties of asbestos, as in its very problematic. This is because there has been no water, winds etc to grind the sand as on earth. Now on Mars the soil has been moved by winds and other natural phenomenon, so it should be far less problematic to just brush it off, not to begin on the more…

Mars soil is apparently toxic chemicals [1]. Antarctica is looking good in comparison.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jul/06/mars-covered...

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#57

Post by tomrod »

baq wrote: post #44
andyfal12 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100 percent agree. The most logical plan I heard was the following: Solar power works way better, and potentially nonstop at the poles of the moon. Use that energy to cook moonrock into building materials and lauch it all into orbit on an electromagnetic mass driver. Then design and build Oniell cylinders, once we have rigorous tests of artificial gravity on humans. If you want a Mars base after the fact, go for it.…

> The most logical plan I heard was the following: Solar power works way better, and potentially nonstop at the poles of the moon. the problem is, unless you're at the pole, you have 2 weeks of power followed by 2 weeks of pitch black darkness, so you have to have a lot of batteries or the station isn't livable 50% of the time.

Build two bases?

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#58

Post by tomrod »

hutzlibu wrote: post #45
WalterBright wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> before we explored mars for indiginous life first! We already have. It's a liveless rock. How much more do we keep moving the goal posts and beating that dead horse?

Maybe until we explored a bit more, than a few areas on the surface? Mars is HUGE. Potential areas for life might be in vulcanic areas underground. Might not be a high chance, granted. But the chances that anything from your project survives are far lower - but it would definitely damage research on current or historic life on mars a lot.

Eventually our microbial biomes will merge with any ecosystem or planet we visit. It's virtually guaranteed. This shouldn't stand in the way of our visiting, we should simply be prepared for intermixture.

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#59

Post by mobiletelephone »

WalterBright wrote: post #26
curtis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mars has some stuff that the Moon doesn't: volatiles. According to Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volatiles ): In planetary science, volatiles are the group of chemical elements and chemical compounds with low boiling points that are associated with a planet's or moon's crust or atmosphere. Examples include nitrogen, water, carbon dioxide, ammonia, hydrogen, methane and sulfur dioxide. Of these the only on…

> adds a lot of difficulty and risk That's a vast understatement. Don't forget expense and time! Orders of magnitude more. I don't think there's any realistic way of getting a sustainable base on Mars without doing it first on the moon. On the moon you can learn from mistakes. On Mars you die from the first mistake.

Does it matter? I think there will be enough qualified candidates who know, understand and are willing to take the risk.

Re: The Next Moon Landing Is Near, Thanks to Pioneering Engineers

#60

Post by iUsedToCode »

isostatic wrote: post #47
swatkat wrote: post #6

I have great hopes on Team Indus. Hoping they'll pull of this mission. They've signed a PSLV-XL launch contract with ISRO, and they seem to be on track with spacecraft and rover development[0]. Japan's X-prize entrant HAKUTO will also be ride-sharing on this mission[1]. It'll be an exciting 2018 for us, we have two moon rover missions from India - Chandrayaan 2 from ISRO[2], and Team Indus. [0] https://medium.com/tea…

"we have two moon rover missions from India" How can India justify a moon mission when you can barely walk round Delhi with tripping over homeless children ?

I'm guessing that's the reason they are doing a moon mission. Have to give them hope, have to jump start the economy. Can't saw trousers for eternity, can they?

Educated people will continue fleeing if nothing is done to keep them in. You cannot solve homelessness by giving out houses, jobs are the biggest help.

Post reply on HN