posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 06:28 PM
reply to post by Aquarius1
Don't get me wrong, we need to send people back to the moon. Even a mission to do a few quick orbits without landing and then come home would benefit
the redevelopment and testing of the required technologies.
But why not have them control a rover on the Earth side of the moon? Why does it have to be the far side?
We (the human race) have a small fleet of probes up there right now from the US, Japan, India and China. These are all survey
scanning the entire lunar surface across the entire spectrum (additionally, there are sensors to detect the presence of specfic chemicals like water
ice or mineral deposits): the human eye is a VASTLY inferior device for observation.
For the cost of one manned mission they could deploy several relay satellites that would counter line-of-sight issues allowing machines to be
controlled real-time from here on Earth. The secondary benefit is that once the relays are in place they will remain there to be used by any later
mission for thier entire designed lifespan.
What have they found that needs to be examined first hand?
The only reason to send people up there for this type of mission is to provide a deliberate interuption in the data stream. Radio/video between Earth
and the capsule, video from the lunar rover to the capsule. In this way there is no chance of an unauthorised viewing as the data is all in orbit
until the astronuats return to Earth. Once back home, the data can be taken away and reviewed at a secure location where access can be controlled
This mission is too specific. There is nothing that can be accomplished on one side of the moon that cannot be accomplished on the other, unless the
mission is to study something that is only
on the far side.
This idea is a cover story for something else.
edit on 28-11-2010 by [davinci] because: Content