It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
well as i said what they done in days is probably more than a probe could do in months or even years,they are spending billions of pounds to send things out into solar system which i don,t have a problem with except that with technology today we could have men on the moon doing studies all over it but their not,why not?we could have them up there long enough in this day and age.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: sparky31
And what good does a mission that stayed on the moon for a total of a couple of days when you're talking about a mission that has a minimum duration of six months? Apollo 17 had a total of 75 hours on the surface. That's going to give you great data for that THREE DAYS. That's not going to tell you what kind of exposures you're looking at over a week, or a month, or a year. Which is what you need to stay there.
What good does being on the surface, nowhere near the most likely landing areas for a long term colony, do for helping to plan for a colony, or even a science base that is there for months at a time? The Apollo missions were nowhere near the South Pole, which is the most likely place for a base to stay, as there is ice there, which would give them water for various things in the base.
Yes, we've been there, but again, the manned missions wouldn't give you enough data that is needed for a long term stay on the moon.
surely they know all that already,its been over 30 years since man stepped on the moon so i,m guessing they already figured most of that out even years before they sent anyone up there or it was sending their people up on a suicide mission.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: sparky31
And again, yes you learn more by being there. But a probe that monitors radiation around the moon for months is going to do a lot more than any manned mission lasting days is going to do. The same with landing areas, and ice sources, and a lot of other really important details vital to a long term stay. Probes are vital to developing the technology that is needed to stay there, as well as finding where they're going to stay.
a reply to: sparky31
probe to the moon........why?
UK 'to lead moon landing' funded by public contributions
A British-led consortium has outlined its plans to land a robotic probe on the Moon in 10 years' time.
Lunar Mission One
Its aim is to raise £500m for the project from donations by the public
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: steaming
You mean the Van Allen Belt that Van Allen himself said it was possible to get through?
to do what? more than the people that were already there? do not see the point if you ask me unless no one was there in first place lol
Sure. Preserving historical sites has a long tradition. Can't really put any teeth into those recommendations though.
Were you aware and are you in favor of Keep Out Zones on the moon that were proposed by NASA administrator Charles Bolden?
They aren't removing Reseau marks from the Apollo image catalogs. They are providing images without the Reseau marks. Those with the marks are still available for public use. Here ya' go. Knock yourself out. All the Reseau marks anyone could ask for.
Do you support of the Arizona State University cooperative agreement with NASA to digitally remove all the cross-hairs from Apollo image catalogues?