"...one giant leap for mankind."

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, that sounds fine by me. I mean, it's a little sad when the most NASA can talk about is something that happened 40 years ago. We should try to shoot for beyond that, or just close our space program for good. Of course, that's just my opinion.

Woah, Deja Vu.
 
I really don't like the thought of closing down the space program at all, but I can how it's hard to justify the expense of space travel when the country's economy is in freefall and the deficit is measured in trillions of dollars.
 
I'm all for putting a man on Mars eventually (we can't let the commies beat us to it!), haven't we done, like, jack sh*t on the moon since the 70's? Of all the lunar landings, only one had any sort of actual scientist on board (a geologist). If we've got any hope of avoiding the moon turning into a marketing trash heap like the earth, we've got to put up more scientific research into it, not just send people up there to dick around.

Same deal with Mars. If astronauts need to stop on the moon on the way, that's fine, but actual scientific research has got to be going into this. Otherwise, the private sector will turn space into a giant billboard as soon as physically possible.
 
Barb said:
I really don't like the thought of closing down the space program at all, but I can how it's hard to justify the expense of space travel when the country's economy is in freefall and the deficit is measured in trillions of dollars.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I forgot about that. We should wait until our economy's good again before commiting any sort of massive money. But we still can't stop at the moon, otherwise other countries won't. Imagine what would happen if China reached Mars first...
 
40 years >.> Not too long ago really....only thing that worries at the moment is not having a space shuttle soon. Other than that, it's time to go beyond the moon and aim for all planets that can be safely visited.
 
I remember sometime, reading an article that scientists had come up with a way to solve the recession. Their answer was: space.

I didn't read anymore than that, but I love the moon.
 
I totally agree. We should wait until this whole economy thing is solved first. Then we can focus on mars. But I guess the moon as a pitstop wouldn't be such a bad idea.
 
Buzz Aldrin said:
On the spring morning in 1927 when Charles Lindbergh set off alone across the Atlantic Ocean, only a handful of explorer-adventurers were capable of even attempting the feat. Many had tried before Lindbergh's successful flight, but all had failed and many lost their lives in the process. Most people then thought transatlantic travel was an impossible dream. But 40 years later, 20,000 people a day were safely flying the same route that the "Lone Eagle" had voyaged. Transatlantic flight had become routine.

Forty years ago today, Neil Armstrong, Mike Collins and I began our quarter-million-mile journey through the blackness of space to reach the moon.

Neil and I walked its dusty ancient soil, becoming the first humans to stand upon another world. Yet today, no nation -- including our own -- is capable of sending anyone beyond Earth's orbit, much less deeper into space.

For the past four years, NASA has been on a path to resume lunar exploration with people, duplicating (in a more complicated fashion) what Neil, Mike and our colleagues did four decades ago. But this approach -- called the "Vision for Space Exploration" -- is not visionary; nor will it ultimately be successful in restoring American space leadership. Like its Apollo predecessor, this plan will prove to be a dead end littered with broken spacecraft, broken dreams and broken policies.

Instead, I propose a new Unified Space Vision, a plan to ensure American space leadership for the 21st century. It wouldn't require building new rockets from scratch, as current plans do, and it would make maximum use of the capabilities we have without breaking the bank. It is a reasonable and affordable plan -- if we again think in visionary terms.

On television and in movies, "Star Trek" showed what could be achieved when we dared to "boldly go where no man has gone before." In real life, I've traveled that path, and I know that with the right goal and support from most Americans, we can boldly go, again.

A race to the moon is a dead end. While the lunar surface can be used to develop advanced technologies, it is a poor location for homesteading. The moon is a lifeless, barren world, its stark desolation matched by its hostility to all living things. And replaying the glory days of Apollo will not advance the cause of American space leadership or inspire the support and enthusiasm of the public and the next generation of space explorers.

Now, I am not suggesting that America abandon the moon entirely, only that it forgo a moon-focused race. As the moon should be for all mankind, we should return there as part of an internationally led coalition. Using the landers and heavy-lift boosters developed by our partners, we could test on the moon the tools and equipment that we will need for our ultimate destination: homesteading Mars by way of its moons.

Let the lunar surface be the ultimate global commons while we focus on more distant and sustainable goals to revitalize our space program. Our next generation must think boldly in terms of a goal for the space program: Mars for America's future. I am not suggesting a few visits to plant flags and do photo ops but a journey to make the first homestead in space: an American colony on a new world.

Robotic exploration of Mars has yielded tantalizing clues about what was once a water-soaked planet. Deep beneath the soils of Mars may lie trapped frozen water, possibly with traces of still-extant primitive life forms. Climate change on a vast scale has reshaped Mars. With Earth in the throes of its own climate evolution, human outposts on Mars could be a virtual laboratory to study these vast planetary changes. And the best way to study Mars is with the two hands, eyes and ears of a geologist, first at a moon orbiting Mars and then on the Red Planet's surface.

Mobilizing the space program to focus on a human colony on Mars while at the same time helping our international partners explore the moon on their own would galvanize public support for space exploration and provide a cause to inspire America's young students. Mars exploration would renew our space industry by opening up technology development to all players, not just the traditional big aerospace contractors. If we avoided the pitfall of aiming solely for the moon, we could be on Mars by the 60th anniversary year of our Apollo 11 flight.

Much has been said recently about the Vision for Space Exploration and the future of the international space station. As we all reflect upon our historic lunar journey and the future of the space program, I challenge America's leaders to think boldly and look beyond the moon. Yes, my vision of "Mars for America" requires bold thinking. But as my friend and Gemini crewmate Jim Lovell has noted, our Apollo days were a time when we did bold things in space to achieve leadership. It is time we were bold again in space.
Click to expand...
Washington Post: Buzz Aldrin: Time to Boldly Go Once More

Hehe. I'd say that Buzz Aldrin's spirit has holding up steadily these past four decades, and his vision for American space exploration sounds appealing already. A Mars mission would carry some risks, but then, the adventure would still be memorable, paving the way for the enthusiasm of others who wish to explore space themselves, expanding humanity's limits that much farther across our interplanetary neighborhood.
 
I'm all up for another studio recording.*shot*
Seriously though mars? Hmm a bit too far if you ask me.
 
Edo-kun said:
Same deal with Mars. If astronauts need to stop on the moon on the way, that's fine, but actual scientific research has got to be going into this. Otherwise, the private sector will turn space into a giant billboard as soon as physically possible.
Click to expand...

We're actually doing scientific research on Mars right now, with the Mars Rovers. And the plan for a Mars landing usually involves an extended stay to study the possibility of life having existed or still existing there in some form.

Barb said:
I really don't like the thought of closing down the space program at all, but I can how it's hard to justify the expense of space travel when the country's economy is in freefall and the deficit is measured in trillions of dollars.
Click to expand...

I see landing on Mars as being similar to the Moon landing. It's a big expense, but actually getting there will do a great deal for the nation's (if not the world's) morale. Besides, imagine all the Mars-themed crap that could be sold. That alone could likely boost the economy.
 
Yo! Dig this, fellow dudes and dudettes:

Here is the glyph of the Indian/Western zodiac sign 'Cancer':

cancersymbol.jpg


Turn that glyph 90° anti-clockwise. Looks pretty much identical to the number '69', right?

The Moon is the sole ruler of the Indian/Western zodiac sign Cancer. The first historically known Moon landing occurred 40 years ago today (ie. on July 20, 1969). The last two digits of the year '1969' contain, of course, the numbers '6' and '9' - in that particular order.
Furthermore, the tropical duration of Cancer is from June 21 to July 22. So July 20 actually falls within the tropical duration of Cancer - the only Indian/Western zodiac sign to be ruled by the Moon.
Also, the first known man to walk on the Moon - Neil Armstrong - had 'Leo' as his Sun sign. The Indian/Western zodiac sign Leo is the only zodiac sign to be ruled by the Sun itself. The Apollo 11 mission was the first manned mission to land on the Moon. 'Apollo' is the name of the Greek/Roman god of the Sun. Also, at 2:39 UTC on Monday July 21 (10:39 PM EDT, Sunday July 20), 1969, Armstrong opened the hatch, and at 2:51 UTC began his descent to the Moon's surface. 'Sunday' is, of course, named after the Sun whilst 'Monday' is named after the Moon ('Moonday'). The Apollo 11 mission was, astrologically speaking, a true union of the Sun and the Moon!

THIS HELLA TIGHT, Y'AAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Neil_Armstrong_560574.jpg


Anyway, I totally agree with Neil Armstrong and 'Buzz' Aldrin about how we gotta hit up Mars someday. One giant leap for mankind was taken on the Moon, why not at least one more giant leap for mankind on Mars?
C'mon Obama, I know the world's in recession and everything - BUT WE CAN STILL DO IT SOON.
happy.gif
 
Last edited:
That is because the moon is the ultimate sex bomb.
 
The sign for the moon is the number 69 on its side. You really need to get it to get it.
 
I wouldn't mind a trip to the Red Planet. The problem is that it would take at least half a year to reach Mars, which would require large breakthroughs in how we do space travel.
 
Hmm. Possibly not so much.

The way I see it, getting to Mars practically has to involve the International Space Station model on a larger scale - assemble in orbit (or, if we can pull it off, at a LaGrange point) a really large vessel with plenty of supply units, out of modules built on earth (or the moon).

That way, we can assemble a ship that has the ability to carry the year+ worth of provisions required by a mission to Mars. In addition, since the ship would (with the exception of a lander module or thereabout) remain in Terran or Martian orbit at all times, it would be rather reusable - no atmospheric reentry or launch damage to worry about, for a start.

I'd probably go out of my way to design the Martian landers to any parts we end up leaving behind has a use there - as part of a martian base, perhaps? - too. The less we waste, the better off we are.

Anyway. Nothing of this is strictly new - it's just new applications of things we've already done, largely. Just not quite the way we used to do them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom