It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


ATS Members send Probe to the Moon

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 08:30 AM
Ok ATS Members, heres the challenge.
How feasable is it for us to send our own probe to the moon. By probe i mean a flying camera to visit the dark side of the moon, take live video and stills, transmit back to Earth then crash it into the moon.
1 - Probe design
2 - Launching into space
3 - Setting the trajectory for the moon
4 - Funding
5 - Not going to jail for doing it

1 - The actual probe can be made very simply. Its only functions are to get to the moon, send pics then burn.
2 - There are many amateur rocket builders sending home made rockets into space, or very close to space.
3 - Is it that difficult to aim for something that big.?
4 - If the right people can get interested in this i think the costs can be minimilised.
5 - We will got to jail if this is successful. Think of the benefit to mankind though, the truth will be known. (Or not)

1 - The probe its self is basically a transmitting cam corder sat on a container of rocket fuel with compressed air steering facility and a few solar panels. Time to reach the moon is unimportant as long as it gets there.
2 - The rocket builders must be able to encompass a small package payload and release it into space.
3 - Is it as simple as get into space, turn the camera on, point at the moon and ignite the small amount of rocket fuel to start the journey. At this point the solar panels should be charging the electronics. Turn the camera on in a few days and adjust course as neccessary with the compressed air steering device.
4 - Sponsers for this type of mission will be easy to come by but i think it needs to be very low key, so a lot of work will need to go into this area. Any volunteers?
5 - We,ll have a big party in jail.

I believe we can do this.

Thoughts please.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 09:22 AM
lol, the big party in jail sounds like alot of fun.

but i dont know if most people are willing to risk going to jail for a sight at the dark side of the moon. it would realy suck if it got there, and there was nothing on the moon, then we got sent to jail.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 10:41 AM
The dark side of the just dark ... theres a fat cop there constantly saying "theres nothing to see here" heheh..

anyway... doesnt the Moon spin as well? so if the Moon spins, there shouldnt be a "dark side"..cause eventually all sides get some light..right ?

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 10:46 AM
Yes the moon spins but the rate of rotation is such that one face is always facing the earth. If there was no rotation then as the moon orbited the earth, people in the various parts of the world would be able to view all sides of the moon.
Take an apple, place it on the table, now take another apple and put it into orbit around the one on the table (circle the apple on the table). Notice that without a rotation of the "moon" apple, the "moon" would eventually show all of it's faces to the "earth"

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 11:05 AM
This is actually and excellent idea! - and not at all as impractical as many here would believe.

Collective action and fundraising can do remarkable things.

In the end, it will be this kind of out of the box thinking that will lead to real progress towards disclosure.

As far as going to jail - thats one of the myths they use to control us - just ally with a friendly nation (or create your own on an island) and there will be no legal consequences for sending up a moon probe/rover.

Thats not to say they wont send a delta force team your way (especially if they get wind of the project early)

Thats just something you will need to properly prepare for.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 11:14 AM
I think this is a very interesting idea, but what exactly would be the legal consequences of civilians sending a probe to the moon, why would we be sent to jail?
Is it not much different than that company that promotes "space tourism"?
Its not like the rover would have missles or any other kind of weapons built on it

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 11:21 AM
Without the right permits the U.S. will nab you for National Security reasons.

If they choose they will say that you were attempting to disrupt the GPS satellite system (something even civillians would be angry about) and then drop you in a very dark hole in Cuba.

If you attempt to do it in a nation unfriendly to the U.S. Gov. (like Cuba) they would send a Delta team in to eliminate you and sabotage the project.

Go see the Constant Gardener if you want to understand how dangerous the political world can be.

(it was an awesome flick imho)

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 11:35 AM
Why would we want more picture of the moon, especially the dark side of it?...What exactly does this have to do with UFOs or Aliens? Other than the theory there's an ET base on the moon and if there is, what are the chances we'd send our probe to the exact right area of the moon?

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 11:40 AM
You can build whatever probe you want and pay NASA, France, or Russia to launch it...but it would cost millions upon millions of dollars.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 12:37 PM
here are some factors that would make this project extremely difficult.

1. lets say you get this civillian probe to the dark side of the moon. what kind of devices would we use to transmit and recieve video from space. For the video to be credible if we did find something, it would have to be fairly clear. If anyone here has seen a majority of the video's and pictures here on Earth, of our own sky, you know exactly what I mean.

2. To get any investments we would need to sell the idea. By proving that their is either something on the moon that the U.S. gov doesn't want us to see. Or else prove that their is life beyond our planet. So far. no one has any solid evidence that can be used to convince the most skeptical person.

3. We would need a team of astro physicists, aviation experts, mathamaticians, the list of educated people would go on and on and on. NASA space missions aren't as easy as one would think. Without the help of powerfull simulators and onboard computers, I'm not sure this mission would even get past the stages of an idea.

I think that a mission should be set up to just send a rocket into space with a camera, and film space, and the perimeter of earth. Kind of a STS 114 reinactment. That should be something that should be looked into. Either catch it in Earth's orbit, or shoot it off into space until we loose contact. I think that a project like that would be a little more plausible than going to a specific target like the moon. this way you are close to the earth.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 12:47 PM
huh...? wha... oh jeez.. never mind.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 12:51 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77
You can build whatever probe you want and pay NASA, France, or Russia to launch it...but it would cost millions upon millions of dollars.

I would say go with Russia
As long as you pay them enough they will shoot whatever you want into space be it a probe or childrens letters to god.

It cost about $10,000 per pound to launch something into space.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 03:44 PM

It cost about $10,000 per pound to launch something into space.

how do you know that? That seems fairly reasonable.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 04:56 PM
Let's look at some facts here.

1. There is no such thing as the dark side of the moon. Pink Floyd would you love you. There IS the far side of the moon. Sunlight reaches all parts of the moon, why do you think we have phases?

2. This will not happen. It's really hard to get into space. A bunch of really really rich guys did it because they were really really rich. They got into space, for a little bit. No orbiting, no extended existance, nothing. That in itself is incredibly more complicated, and much more difficult. Getting to the Moon many, many times moreso. No nation possesses a rocket capables of even reaching the moon, and nations have even more money than rich guys.

3. All the other reasons. Money, materials, support, a base to launch from, money, not being allowed to do this, programming, and money. Did I mention money?

It ain't happening, not from our end. Not anytime soon anyway.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 06:16 PM
While money IS a big problem, in theory there are cheaper ways to get sattelites/probes out into space.

You could launch a sattelite into geo-synch orbit (by yourself or through an agency) and have it drop a carbon nano-tube cable to the Earth which would then be secured.

You could then - in theory - use the cable as a kind of space elevator to slowly lift probes or satelites into space.

From there its all simple newtonian mechanics that can be accomplished and calculated with relative ease by modern standards.

Sure - its a little out of reach now - but in the next 10-15 years it can be done fairly cost effectively.

We don't have to be shortsighted - we can start raising money and conciousness now - and put the pieces togther later.

Maybe we can dupe (ahem, I mean encourage) the Raliens or Scientologists
to maybe donate a few of their millions to help us achieve this goal.

But probably it would take some eclectic multi-millionaire invetor(s) to really make this kind of a thing happen.

If there is enough will it can be accomplished!

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 07:15 PM
While what you said above is a brilliant idea (currently under discussion elsewhere), and while I fully support it, it will cost vastly more than getting to the moon would, and have vastly more repurcusions and effects around the world. In short, it's kind of stupid to do something really really really hard in order to do something really hard.

Grassroots works for some things. Disclosure, maybe. Conspiracy, maybe. Getting leaving the planet and landing elsewhere not so much.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 07:21 PM
Just wait for the first commercial trips into space. Or go and talk to the Virgin Airlines guy. he HAS ALOT OF MONEY. And would invest in something if you show him proof that he could be the first to discover things.

Civilians aren't advanced enough yet to do things cheaply. We need to wait a while.


posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 08:45 PM
The nano tube would need to be non-conductive, otherwise static charges will build up in the line and it will snap like a fuse.

Maybe alot of hydrogen balloons could be used and then you don't need a huge rocket. The hydrogen could also aid the rockets.

posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 10:26 PM
A few points:

First, there is no "dark side" of the moon. Correct terminology is "far side" of the moon. As the moon rotates, it always shows the same side to earth, but as it orbits earth, there are times when the far side of the moon basks in the rays of the sun (during the "new moon" phase).

Now having quite a fun time when I was younger launching model rockets, I was often able to achieve 1000-1500 feet with a small rocket using only a A-size solid engine (about $10 for a 3-pack at the local hobby store). These rockets would achieve near escape velocity with these engines, they just weren't powerful enough to launch it from the atmosphere. Given this, it wouldn't be too out of the question to design a rocket, of very small size, that could carry camera equipment out of orbit. Propellant could be made from readilly available household items, or, to lessen the risk of Federal notice, a multi-stage, large cell powered "model" rocket that could launch a cardboard tube into space. Weight would be a very minor issue, as cameras are currently made that weigh as little as a few ounces, and someone that can build a circuit board could likely make a rudimentary navigation system (with roughly the processing power of a Commodore 64 - the same amount of power that took Apollo to the moon), that would weigh very little as well. The cost of navigation systems, however, could be a little detrimental. If you want to use fins that can adjust for direction control, and micro-engines that could fire while in space to correct the course of the rocket, you're adding a little weight, and much cost to the system. Servos to control the main and secondary (and posibly tertiary) phases of the rocket would cost money, and would be lost completely. If you're not looking for any sort of magnificent zoom on the camera, it's pretty easy to load a small camera into the system (I did it once with a model rocket, that used a rom stick to record a brief video after the ejection of the recovery parachute - all for only about $75 - in 1992). If you want digital zoom and such on your camera, you're looking at higher costs and weight. It is possible. It just may not be cheap.

As far as federal regulations on launching a private rocket, as far as I know, as long as you check with the FAA to make sure there isn't an aircraft in the flight trajectory, it's pretty legal, under a certian engine power level (I'm not sure exactly what the power level is, but it was set to prohibit unauthorized launches of ICBMs - far heavier than we're looking at here). As long as you're not risking collision with an aircraft, and the FAA is aware of your launch, you should be fine. (If I'm missing something here, someone please let me know)

I think it could be done with a rocket that weighs less than ten pounds overall, probably a double (maybe triple stage) rocket, and possibly even using multi-engine configurations of readilly available model rocket engines (probably E cell or greater). The only trick would be proper synchronization of engine ignition (which would only happen with an integrated, high temperature, electrical arc ignition system (a couple AA batteries could produce enough spark), or a synchronized liquid fuel ignition system (as in a slight injection and ignition of gasoline or other similar substance)).

My final recomendation on this - experiment. Learn model rockets. See if you can even send one into space (radio transmitting altimeters are pretty light, and not too expensive now-a-days). If you know you can get a light rocket out of orbit (perhaps even with a payload or two, to simulate the weight of the real rocket), then you start development on the actual thing.

It can be done. It can be done legally. Just learn about it, and do it. And, if you want to avoid jail time, make damn sure you check with the FAA before any high-altitude launches.

posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 02:59 AM
Thats the spirit. We would probably be better off launching here in the UK, I do know that there are lots of rocket launching clubs here who would be interested in taking a payload into orbit. Can you launch a rocket with a rocket? Take a complete rocket into space containing the camera probe, set the navigation and fire the second rocket. That should get you to the moon in a matter of weeks. Once there we would get one sweep around the back side of the moon, capturing as much video and stills as possible. Once round, facing earth again, transmitt footage and let the probe head off into space.
If it became a serious project i think we would all be surprised how quickly investor, inventors and intersted parties would come on board.
Even if we got some great, clear footage that showed nothing but rock imagine the achievement that would be, and of course clearing up one conspiracy.
Now imagine the footage showed something of interest? It would of course be the biggest archiological find ever.
So, all you inventors and investors out there get your socks on and get moving. I,m gonna try to get some basic costs together.
I,ll report back.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in