It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
At the moment, it is not, and it's not going to be unless somebody brilliant comes up with a better and cheaper way to get there and back.
Kennedy said, "We choose to go to the Moon -and do the OTHER things- NOT because they are easy, but because they are hard.".
The Chinese are planning to mine the moon next decade. This is what it's all really about.
The first government to successfully carry tons of H3 from the moon back to earth will become the dominant economy within a matter of years.
We need to beat them to it.
Aldrin endorses the formation of an International Lunar Development Corporation to begin commercial enterprises on the moon. And a broad collation of governments — Russia, China, India, the U.S., and others — should form this quasigovernmental organization, which would help private enterprises capitalize on the lunar resources. Together, these nations can build that lunar gas station.
“Who should send up the propellant? China, India, Europe. We’re going to Mars, we need propellant. And we could buy propellant from them at our moon gas station,” he told Vanity Fair in June.
There are real commercial activities that private enterprises could develop on the moon as well: Helium 3 can be mined, and heavy metal meteorites could be a source of rare earth metals. And the presence of water ice would make great rocket fuel — and rocket fuel is gets us to Mars. Aldrin thinks that base could form part of a transportation infrastructure that would enable us to get to near Earth objects such as asteroids, Martian moon Phobos, even Mars itself and beyond.
The space legend, who is launching a new think tank called U.S.S. Enterprise — which stands for Unified, Strategic, Space Enterprise — believes NASA should think about all of the planets for the most efficient travel across the solar system. And a key item for America should be a permanent base on Phobos.
reply to post by JadeStar
Computers are used by the masses of people. If they would have not been affordable, then very few would be using them.
NASA would most likley only need $10-20 Billion a year to build up a good infrastructure.
$10-20 Billion? Thats a pitance in regards to goverment spending. Hell that likley the US military toliet paper bill.
Still, if you want to support very expensive white collar welfare, I guess a space program is a good way to keep our scientists and technicians from selling their skills to the highest bidder.
It should be about 4 to 7 times that to get serious. And even then it still would consume a smaller percentage of the US federal budget than it did during the 1960s.
Nope: 17 so we were both wrong..
Nope: 17 so we were both wrong..
I must of been thinking of russia.
Ironic really seeing as russias getting more done at the moment and has
Had since the 70's a better saftey record than the usa.
Guess it shows the us gov couldnt organise a piss up in a brewery i guess
If offerd a chance to go on a soyuz id take it.
If i was ever in the past offerd a spot on the shuttle id run a mile!
reply to post by lostbook
they encountered E.T. them E.Ts told them not to go there.
the moon has a dark side which cannot be seen from earth called the dark side of the moon.
thats where all their bases are.
to cut it short; there has been 3 astronauts who went there after the incident and never came back.
from that point on man didn't go there anymore, only robots
That depends on what you mean by getting things done.
Where are all the Russian probes to Mars, the outer planets? Where are the great Russian space observatories?
They're quite safe now that they don't go anywhereedit on 24-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)