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.

 

Crowd Sourcing A Public Moon Mission

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2016 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Let me preface this with saying that this has nothing to do with lunar mission one. In fact what I am proposing is an un-manned recon mission. Let me start from the beginning.

I was one of those kids who dreamt of space, following every major development of my lifetime. Reading the science fiction that so often comes to fruition I always believed I would make it one day. Alas it seems this is not to be, at least there's a chance for my kids. But I digress. The question that still bothers me the most is why we havent returned to the moon? There's the usual lines of 'we cant learn anything more' or 'the cost out weighs the benefits' but I never bought that. If your on ats then I assume that you've seen at least one 'something on the moon' threads or videos. Well perhaps thats why.

There have been many new moon images over the past few years, the lunar reconnaissance orbiter, the Chinese probe whose rover only made it fifty feet from the lander if i remember. But what I want are images not owned and possibly photoshoped by any government or private orginazation.

I believe we could crowd sorce this relativly cheap. Buy payload space on a space x rocket. Release a multitude of small, cheap visual drones on a one way suicide mission into the lunar surface. The most difficult part I can think of is the telemetry/control of the probes. The technical aspects of communication is beyond me but i could probably handle some of the math for course plotting.

Again this is just throwing ideas at the wall and seeing what sticks. There are some brilliant people here so what do you all think, just a dumb idea from a arm chair scientist or a possibly doable and worthwhile? Let me know what you think and your ideas.




posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: coven83


The question that still bothers me the most is why we haven't returned to the moon?

Because its expensive, theres no return for investors, and really, really inhospitable.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Space infrastructure will start somewhere why not the moon?
link



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:16 PM
link   
if you can bring back a few tons of He3, count me in



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: syrinx high priest

There are many resources on the moon, so again why?
What do you think of the idea?
edit on 12-5-2016 by coven83 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: coven83
a reply to: intrptr

Space infrastructure will start somewhere why not the moon?
link

Because its cheaper to start from earth orbit. Less fuel and infrastructure required there than traveling to the moon, landing and then taking off again from the moon.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Its a good point in theory but once a outpost is established it changes. The main cost of space flight is in getting the weight of the rocket and payload out of the atmosphere. The costs would even out quickly once established.

But what do you think of the main premise of the OP
edit on 12-5-2016 by coven83 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: coven83

The people already payed for several trips to the moon through taxes.

The got bored and changed channels.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: coven83
If you release drones without going into a lunar orbit, you'll only get to see a tiny portion of the moon in high-rez. If you can achieve a lunar orbit, why not just use a camera with a small telescope, like LRO does? Then you could cover the lunar surface systematically, going over many so-called "anomaly" sites and even attempting to photograph the Apollo landing sites.

Another question is - who will be receiving the data, processing it, and releasing it to the public? It will have to be done through an organisation of some kind, because general public doesn't possess such capabilities.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Keeping the probe in orbit for an extended amount of time would increase cost was my first thought, but you may be right.

Also idk who would receive data im just spit balling here. Thanx for adding to the intended conversation though, any suggestions? Perhaps we could purchase server time from someone?



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: coven83

NASA seems to be pretty generous with the private sector, so maybe some R&D could be skipped.. but I don't know if you truly appreciate the costs associated with a mission like this.

Pioneer 4, the first probe to fly within the vicinity of the moon, cost $150 million in 1959 dollars. That's something like $1.2 billion in 2016.
Also remember most people who were involved in the R&D of projects like this are either retired or dead. Even NASA would struggle at attempting something like this again.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 11:55 PM
link   
I hear ya it seems like common sense to form a global coalition/go fund to get some serious mining ventures going. The returns could eventually become staggering.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 03:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: coven83
But what I want are images not owned and possibly photoshoped by any government or private orginazation.

So you want to be one being accused of photoshoping the photos?


Good luck.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: coven83

I think it's a matter of time that civilians can build their own satellites and propulsion to send a small probe to the moon , sending pictures to earth.

I mean you now see people building their own helium balloon with cameras and tracking systems , so when the balloon collapses they can find it back with gps.

What if someone would build a small multiple trap rocket or something else . and starts from the point the balloon collapses at 35mile altitude?

We have the technology today , only one person smart enough could trigger a hype , just like drones do today , you can even wear a vr to look through drones in flight..

I do find this Idea interesting , but i do think spacex already has well paying multinational corporations standing in line , eager to put their own agenda into space..
edit on 0b25America/ChicagoFri, 13 May 2016 07:08:25 -0500vAmerica/ChicagoFri, 13 May 2016 07:08:25 -05001 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: coven83

While i like your idea, and would love the mission to be a success...



But what I want are images not owned and possibly photoshoped by any government or private orginazation.


If they're PS images and covering up what we all *really* want to see on the moon (don't have to spell it out do i?) that is exactly why such a mission would fail before it left the ground..or if it did actually make it to launch, i would imagine it would develop 'technical issues' during flight.

They simply couldn't allow it.



posted on May, 13 2016 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: coven83

(Thinking out loud)

Launching a payload into Earth orbit costs between $54 million (SpaceX) and ~$300 million (Atlas V) - Russian, European, Japanese and Indian launchers are somewhere in between.

Once in Earth orbit, the moon probe will need an upper stage to boost it to a trans-lunar trajectory. This upper stage will be roughly twice as massive as the probe itself, or tripling the overall mass of the rocket payload.

If you want to put the probe in lunar orbit, this will take a rocket & fuel combo that would be roughly as massive as the probe. Working backwards, this would double the mass of the upper stage, quadrupling the overall rocket payload.

If you want to soft-land the probe, this would take ~3x the fuel of just making lunar orbit. Again working backwards, this dramatiaclly multiplies the mass of the upper stage and the total mass of the rocket payload.

Note that the increased guidance and control systems required for entry into lunar orbit and/or landing will increase the mass of the probe itself, which (working backwards) will increase the mass of the orbit/descent stages which will increase the mass of the upper stage, which increases the mass of the rocket payload.

(As an aside, this is why men haven't been to the Moon since 1972. Technology has made computers much smaller and lighter and require less power, but men are the same mass and size and their requirements for food and air have not changed. Furthermore, you need rockets to get them off of the moon and return them to Earth. Working backwards again, this means that the orbit & descent stages must be bigger,which makes the upper stage MUCH bigger, which makes the launching rocket gigantic - For manned missions, you need a Saturn V or something like it; and that is a fantastically expensive piece of equipment.)

Back to the probe...

None of what I have written is a show-stopper for your idea. I am simply defining the magnitude of the problem. Three countries have thus far soft-landed unmanned probes on the Moon, and there is a prize out there for the private organization that does it first: Lunar X-Prize

The lowest mass (and therefore lowest cost) mission that could return high resolution images of the lunar surface (and artifacts there-on) would be a Ranger-style impactor. That's right, screw landing, orbit, or even slowing down - pick a spot and hit it with something that will send back high-speed, high-def video like this:


"BAIL-OUT, YOU FOOL!!!"

Note that if you want images of a specfic area (say, an Apollo landing site), you will need precise targeting of both the probe and the camera, and a good guidance & control system. Your probe may be fully automated (increasing your computer requirements), or you could track the probe's trajectory on the way to the Moon and send course corrections (increasing your tracking and communications requirements).

Please do not risk hitting the site itself. If it's any known landing site (especially Apollo), historians will never forgive you. If it's an alien artifact, ATS will lynch you. If you hit an alien base, well, That Would Be Bad.

Miss by a mile and you should still get good pix without doing damage. Just make sure your guidance system is accurate enough that you can miss by a mile.


edit on 13-5-2016 by Saint Exupery because: Afterthoughts




top topics



 
4

log in

join