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.
Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by amongus
Why in the he'll havnt other countries copied our lunar program from the frigging 1960s, and beat us and put a base on the moon?
I thought Russia was proposing it (yet again).
Originally posted by charles1952
I like the comments so far, but I'd like to try a slightly different direction.
I don't see anything in Obama's history, or his record as President to indicate that he wants the US to be an exceptional country. I think he wants us to be just one more nation in a mob of nations.
If the US took the lead in space colonization we would be exceptional again, and it wouldn't have been done by the United Nations. I'm sorry, but I don't believe he wants us to be anything special, or a world leader.
Russia will charge US astronauts US$51 million ($86 million) per return trip to the International Space Station (ISS) from 2012 and will resume selling seats to space tourists, Russian news agencies reported.
will be honest with you....the no fly zones on the moon was VERY weird and I have absolutely no rational answer as to why we would do that...
The reason: avoiding any spraying of rocket exhaust or dust onto certain historical sites and artefacts on the moon.
The historical sites are of course the Apollo landing sites and artefacts present on the moon. And the “recommendations” are for preserving and protecting these historical sites. There are currently more than three dozen historical sites that preserve the more than four-decade-old remains.
“Apollo 11 and 17 sites [will] remain off-limits, with ground-travel buffers of 75 metres and 225 metres from each respective lunar lander,” states the July 20 guidelines of NASA. Science journal had obtained the guidelines.
No legal binding.
I never said you did come up with that figure but it does beg the question.....
Why so much money for tape and a hand held calculator?
Regards, Iwinder
Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by Iwinder
I never said you did come up with that figure but it does beg the question.....
Why so much money for tape and a hand held calculator?
Regards, Iwinder
I imagine new research and studies for updated means of getting there, training, materials, test launches, reworking of designs, new tech to "invent" from scratch because of the necessity,
...then of course all the above for habitats that would protect the people from radiation, develop ways for it to be self-sustainable for loooong term, multiple vehicles for lunar surface
...on and on and on.edit on 1/25/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)
materials, test drives, reworking of designs, new tech to "invent" from scratch because of the necessity?
reply to post by Chamberf=6
In the current financial environment, I think it would be wasteful (financially not scientifically). Sure I would love to see a manned mission to the moon, but $81,000,000,000 could be used for more immediate NEEDS at this time.
Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by Iwinder
So you wouldn't update anything from the '60's??
And how many alive today went to the moon that could do it now??
How many times has long term habitation on the moon been done??
reply to post by Chamberf=6
Does anyone reply without emotions on ATS anymore?
Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
Good grief.
Does anyone reply without emotions on ATS anymore?
Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by Iwinder
OK...
Glad your not in the space expedition business then.
btw those new cars you were talking about cost $1000 or even less in the '60's.
Did their price remain the same till today?
edit on 1/25/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)