To the moon!

India is sending a mission to the moon. Many of u must be knowing this and some not. USA did it 25 years back. Does it make sense to send a mission to moon now????. many may argue that india is doing this to show their prowess in space.
1. is India tryin to compete with china who r also making blips on this front?

To add to this, many developed countries have shown interset as well.

2. Indian rocket scientist-turned-president Abdul Kalam spoke out again in favor of his country's participation in Martian exploration. is the moon a stop over?

3. is the trip to moon really worth it? the money involved could be used to build satellites which directly benefit people on the earth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS: my 1st post ever. dont blast me plzzzzzzzzz

[edit on 23-1-2005 by hanks7772000]

To be honest, in my opinion and humans that travel into sapce for whatever reason makes us one step closer to the truth.

Its not really worth the costs but there are many things from the previous we did not see. It would be good to see the moon in full colour and perfect video quality.

Welcome to ATS and i hope you enjoy your stay here!!

Blessed be

[edit on 23/1/2005 by wyatt43]

Originally posted by hanks7772000

India is sending a mission to the moon. Many of u must be knowing this and some not. USA did it 25 years back. Does it make sense to send a mission to moon now????

. many may argue that india is doing this to show their prowess in space.
1. is India tryin to compete with china who r also making blips on this front?

To add to this, many developed countries have shown interset as well.

2. Indian rocket scientist-turned-president Abdul Kalam spoke out again in favor of his country's participation in Martian exploration. is the moon a stop over?

3. is the trip to moon really worth it? the money involved could be used to build satellites which directly benefit people on the earth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS: my 1st post ever. dont blast me plzzzzzzzzz

[edit on 23-1-2005 by hanks7772000]

Welcome to the forums, hope you wear asbestos underwear

Ok, the Moon is not worthless, pointless or a waste of time. There is water there, there is materials there, but most of all there is less gravity there.

For a space mission, we currently have to bring 100% of the materials and consumables we want out of the Earths gravity well, which is both expensive and wasteful. If we could build a base on the Moon, we could exploit the water for fuel (split it into hydrogen and oxygen using solar power) and we could exploit minerals there for materials. In essence, a Mars mission would be a lot lot lot cheaper to launch from the Moon, so much so that 3 Mars missions from Earth would pay for 10 from the Moon.

Yes, the US went to the Moon 25 years ago. They collected 150kg of Moon rock, they played golf, thats it. Nothing. What was learnt as a result? Next to nothing. What long term products resulted? Next to nothing. The US Moon missions were a public relations thing to beat the Russians. The Moon can be so much more than that. To do this, you of course first have to GO to the Moon India have one of the largest economies on the planet, and its growing.

Currently the US manned space missions are on a downward slope. The shuttles will be retired by the end of this decade, there currently hasnt been much useful work at all on a replacement (the CEV), which is supposed to have its first flight by 2014. The Russians have the most experience in long term manned missions, and they have a reliable but one use system (Soyuz). The Chinese improved on Soyuz (its bigger and made from more modern materials - plus they have just announced a 6 day 2 man mission to launch in September), they have the economy to back missions, and they have the determination to as well plus they have a 3 man reusable system under development at the moment.

Hope that helps!

The moon is a stepping stone for furhter interplanetary missions, humans will first settle there before anywhere else in the universe..
India's mission to the moon is not manned, it is a lunar probe called Chandrayaan and is set for 2008..Indias' space doctrine does not involve manned missions(indigenous) in the near future(cpl of decades) at least...
They are more interested in the automated remote exploration/research of space...
This was made clear after numerous questioned were raised about India's manned ambitions after the shenzhou launch..
The assistance offered for the mars mission, would be mostly technical, like various countries are more contributing to the ISS..no Indian astronauts on Mars Im afraid; not in the first batch at least...
although kalpana chawla (naturalised US astronaut) could have possibly been one of the first on Mars, if she hadn't died aboard columbia;she was one of the most experienced NASA astronauts had...

And btw Has the Shenzhou proven to be superior to the soyuz?
China doesn't seem to wan to participate in any combined space effort..they want to make it on their own...Or am I mistaken about that?

I think this belongs to the space exploration forum

[edit on 23-1-2005 by Daedalus3]

hanks7772000, welcome to ATS, don't forget your tin-foil hat Anyway, you do bring up ligitimate questions, but I think most people in this thread are missing something big. He3 that is Helium-3 which is abundant on the Moon but really really really really really rare on earth, There is something like 800 Trillion USD worth of the stuff up there. Now what use is it? Check out these links.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.space.com...

www.mines.edu...

Originally posted by Daedalus3

And btw Has the Shenzhou proven to be superior to the soyuz?

Not much is known, except that its based on the Soyuz design, is larger and made from modern materials and thus is lighter.

China doesn't seem to wan to participate in any combined space effort..they want to make it on their own...Or am I mistaken about that?

China has extended to the US offers to work together on Space, and has offered to join the International Space Station project, with funding equal to what the US puts in. The US has declined all of these advances, citing 'transfer of technology' as an issue - which is pure bull because China gets more technology every time a manufacturer moves its factories to China than it would get from NASA in space cooperation. It also reckons Chinas space technology isnt mature enough, while not noticing that the US technology is so mature its falling apart.

Originally posted by sardion2000
hanks7772000, welcome to ATS, don't forget your tin-foil hat

Anyway, you do bring up ligitimate questions, but I think most people in this thread are missing something big. He3 that is Helium-3 which is abundant on the Moon but really really really really really rare on earth, There is something like 800 Trillion USD worth of the stuff up there. Now what use is it? Check out these links.

He3 is worthless to us at the moment, when we get standard fusion working then we can look at He3 on the moon. Currently its the amount of water on the moon that has scientists hopping, because you have fuel AND consumables right there.

The problem is is that we dont have fusion working on a commercial level right now with Hydrogen and Deuterium, and He3 has an ignition temperature that is 10 times higher than Hydrogen. Also currently the best reactor we have cannot sustain a fusion reaction because it is too small, and it isnt exactly on the small side itself He3 is a benefit for the future, but not during the life time of anyone on this board.

^^ hmm interesting..always thought china was more of a"I want to do it myself" type of thing...you got any links on the banning of china from combined space activites?

You really think fusion wont happen in anyones lifetime? What do you base that on

Check this link out I believe you'll find it interesting.
www.csmonitor.com...

All you said about He3 is true however we need a more abundant source so we can do more experiments. Right now I agree its not feasible, but we always got to keep our minds open. Predicting technological progress by looking into the past doesn't work. Our development is increasing in speed exponentially and we have not had a major power breakthrough in 50+ years, I think we are overdue for something good to happen in that area. All we gotta wait for now is for Japan and France to stop arguing over where the test reactor is going to be....

Originally posted by sardion2000
You really think fusion wont happen in anyones lifetime? What do you base that on

No, what I said was He3 fusion with fuel from the Moon wont happen in anyone on this boards lifetime. I know fusion currently works, the Joint European Torus (JET) in the UK works fine, it just cant sustain a reaction due to it not being physically large enough.

The ITER will be a Hydrogen-Deuterium-Tritium reaction, not a Helium3 reaction. Helium3 reactions post a HUGELY greater problem than Hi/Deu/Tri reactions due to the high initial reaction/ignition temperature of He3, which is vastly greater than the 100millionC quoted in your link. We havent even begun to seriously experiment with He3, because Hydrogen reactions are fine at the moment.

All you said about He3 is true however we need a more abundant source so we can do more experiments. Right now I agree its not feasible, but we always got to keep our minds open. Predicting technological progress by looking into the past doesn't work. Our development is increasing in speed exponentially and we have not had a major power breakthrough in 50+ years, I think we are overdue for something good to happen in that area. All we gotta wait for now is for Japan and France to stop arguing over where the test reactor is going to be....

We wont ever find a more abundant source for experimental needs than this worlds oceans. When we eventually move into He3 fusion consumption, then fair enough - lets go someplace where its cheap and easy to get. But as I said, thats not going to be for a loooooong time yet. Fusion has been 'just around the corner' for the past 50 years. Its still just around the corner.

As for the location of the ITER, its going to be France or not at all. Count on it.

RichardPrice, thank you for replying. I did not know that ITER wasn't an He3 reactor. Now I understand. I thought He3 was really rare on Earth though.. How much He3 does it take to make a reaction and you said it 'burns' 10x hotter then regular fusion. That would make the reaction 1 billion degrees Is that correct? I can see now what you were getting at. Thanks for Denying my Ingorance Learn something new everyday.

As for the location of the ITER, its going to be France or not at all. Count on it.

France would really derail this technology considering how much we need it? I though that Japan would have more political capitol then France, but I guess not...

Originally posted by sardion2000
RichardPrice, thank you for replying. I did not know that ITER wasn't an He3 reactor. Now I understand. I thought He3 was really rare on Earth though.. How much He3 does it take to make a reaction and you said it 'burns' 10x hotter then regular fusion. That would make the reaction 1 billion degrees

Is that correct? I can see now what you were getting at. Thanks for Denying my Ingorance

Learn something new everyday.

No worries, thats what this place is for, isnt it?

The initial ignition point is a lot higher than the reaction, because a lot of the energy in the reaction comes from liberated neutrons, rather than temperature, but you dont have these neutrons at the start. So the initial temperature will be 10 x higher than D-T, but the reaction temperature will only be 3 or 4 x higher. Still a lot warmer than Florida

France would really derail this technology considering how much we need it? I though that Japan would have more political capitol then France, but I guess not...

Its more the US that would derail their own involvement than anything else. The ITER group consists of the EU, Russia, China, South Korea, the US and Japan. The US, South Korea and Japan want the ITER to be positioned in Japan, while China, Russia and the EU want it in France.

The issue here is that the EU has vastly more experience in fusion reactions and reactors than any other country/group in the world. 3 of the 4 leading countries (using that term loosly obviously in the case of the EU) in the ITER group want it to be in France, while the two minor partners and the US want it in Japan. The general consensus is that the French location is the optimal location, what with it being not in an earthquake zone and all. The only reason that the US wont back down is because of the location - France. What with the current administration being anti French and all.

The EU, China and Russia have agreed that if the US doesnt back down, they will back out of the ITER project and go it alone, leaving SK, Japan and the US to attempt their own project.

[edit on 23/1/2005 by RichardPrice]

Yup, since the american empire is historically based on oil and coal and is hard to beat on that turf , considering the size of the corporations and the huge millitary guarding these corporate interests, only the chinese have the same thirst for oil/coal plus working hard on their the millitary to back it up their claims.

The French ambition instead is to try build a European empire build around french nuclear reactors on the ground and assembled in toulouse Airbus cattle transport in the air, it allmost looks like America in the fifties when everything was going to get bigger and nuclear, in a lot of respects the French look more like Americans (albeit liberal, wich may why you find them annoying hehe) than you would like to admit, they like big and extra-ordinary things, warship their flag and if given the change want to be the self-rightious policeman of the world (now all they need is some millitary victories for a change).

As for the indians, now that China and America are slowly but surely preparing for a colonosation race of the moon, I could imagine the indians want a piece of the pie as well, with the Chinese neighbour gaining in importance , the Indians may find themselve more and more sided with the Americans, certainly not for ideological, but for practical and economic reasons.

Naturally, the coming American missile shields will not only try intercept ICBMS but also could prevent china from claiming the moon for herselve ???

Maybe I do live to see the first interplanetary war afterall....


Anyways, nobody seems te be talking much about Russia anymore, but I think we haven't heard the last of them yet if Puttin gets his act together.




[edit on 23-1-2005 by Countermeasures]

The last thing I heard about Russia was that they were planning a Mars Mission...I know for a fact they have this training excercize to see the feasability of the project...