Comments on: Report: Now that election's decided, NASA may announce new manned lunar mission

By: AnthonyC

AnthonyC — Sun, 11 Nov 2012 21:08:00 +0000

Aragorn’s ancestors tried that, and it didn’t go well http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BAmenor

By: ocker3

ocker3 — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 12:28:00 +0000

Having a person up in space talking to us back on Earth is Much more inspiring than just seeing photos taken by a robot. We can relate to it much easier, we can see how wonderful and exciting it is by hearing it in their voice and we want to do it to.

I for one would happily take a one-way trip to Mars, pity I don’t have the skills to get selected for that trip.

By: ocker3

ocker3 — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 12:27:00 +0000

How do we do that without more space missions?

There’s a very good chance that zero-g research will lead to more cool tech, but as more money gets put into space tech, more crazy stuff will result. We don’t need a high-speed rocket for a robotic mission to Mars, but we could sure use one for a manned mission, bone-density loss and all that. Also, putting a station at one of the Lagrange points makes everything else cheaper and easier. Such a station would probably need to be run by humans.

By: Raziel Abulafia

Raziel Abulafia — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 22:10:00 +0000

Launch a direct to Phobos mission NOW! NASA planned to do this with a modified Apollo capsule + 3rd stage in the 70s so we have no excuse not to do it asap.

By: Michael Smith

Michael Smith — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 20:26:00 +0000

I think they would in the sense that a lunar mission won’t happen without the fantastic hardware from SpaceX.

By: Magnus Redin

Magnus Redin — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 20:04:00 +0000

It is even better to have robots and humans on the spot to improvise and fix the stuff the robots cant fix or lack the software to fix.

By: GregS

GregS — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:35:00 +0000

I guess this means that NASA will now be discarding their alternate plan, formulated in case of a Republican victory, of sending a manned mission to Heaven.

By: Quiche de Resistance

Quiche de Resistance — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:04:00 +0000

shit with all the racist nuts pissed about re-election I hope no one else intends to JFK his legacy.

By: wrecksdart

wrecksdart — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 18:38:00 +0000

Yeah, but…uh…RTFA?

“Plans have probably already been cleared with the Obama Administration but have been kept under wraps in case Republican candidate Mitt Romney won,” according to Space.com.

Wasn’t a campaign promise, at least this time around. Besides, the moon has already been JFK’d, and that mission crossed presidential administration boundaries.

By: miasm

miasm — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 18:33:00 +0000

let’s just wait until the robots can do the job of a human, making all the decisions in situ and oh wait that’s AI.
We’ll solve the problem by waiting for another, more difficult problem to be solved first.

By: Craig Peterson

Craig Peterson — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 18:18:00 +0000

Well if Puerto Rico gets admitted, we will have to go back to replace the old flags.

By: Mark Dow

Mark Dow — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 17:43:00 +0000

Also high bandwidth communication networks for telepresence, mixed with semi-autonomous robotics.

By: John Fleming

John Fleming — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:08:00 +0000

Who says they won’t do it that way? It’s an excellent idea.

By: jetfx

jetfx — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:01:00 +0000

If you doubled NASA’s funding, it would consume 1% of the federal budget. In other words, NASA is a very, very cost effective program, considering the price vs spinoffs. To claim that there is no money to spare for NASA is nonsense, considering how little is spent on it in the first place. And developing faster space travel costs more money.

By: gandalf23

gandalf23 — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:55:00 +0000

Are they restarting the Ares and Constellation programs that were shut down in 2010? They were designed to get us back to the moon and then on to Mars.

By: Troy Daley

Troy Daley — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:45:00 +0000

I would hope that would be the strategy. If I recall correctly, they were experimenting with some sort of relaunch capability on their capsule.

By: anansi133

anansi133 — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:43:00 +0000

A coherent space strategy cannot be done in 4 year chunks. This moon shot is vaporware, because there’s no way it can be finished before the next clown takes office.

If the plan is so good that it can endure a change of president, then it wouldn’t have needed to be postponed until after the election.

Promising us the moon has become yet another empty campaign practice.

By: BonzoDog1

BonzoDog1 — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:41:00 +0000

I certainly didn’t want to imply manned missions should be permanently abandoned. And I don’t discount the value of human presence. But in the nation’s current financial condition there’s no bucks for Buck Rogers and the available funding should be spent more productively.
You want to go to Mars? Develop a faster inter-planetary propulsion technology.

By: Robert Landrigan

Robert Landrigan — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:23:00 +0000

What’s the point in only sending robots if we’re never going to live there? We need people, real, live, breathing, feeling people, to explore and see these wonders. We need them to come back, and tell us what it was like. We need our children to hear those words and look to the stars and sky. Science is more than numbers and results – it’s elevating our species to a new level by application of thought and curiosity.

By: Jellodyne

Jellodyne — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:21:00 +0000

You know what would be better than manned missions? Advanced unmanned missions. I say don’t go back to the moon until there’s a fully equipped moon base and a full tank of rocket fuel waiting on the surface.

The technology we need to develop is robotics which are capable of surveying, mining, refining and manufacturing in space and/or the moon. Robots making robots and turning the asteroids into whatever infrastructure or consumer goods we want or require is the long term goal, the moon would be a good first step.

By: chris coreline

chris coreline — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:08:00 +0000

yeah, its not on. they should divert the funding to personal jet-pack research instead. Democracy my ass.

By: nowimnothing

nowimnothing — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:03:00 +0000

I don’t completely disagree, but do you have an alternative PR solution that works as well as humans in space? I mean sure people marvel at pictures taken by Hubble and the Mars rovers but can that really compare to human boots on the ground? Especially to generations that have never experienced it first hand.

By: dpamac

dpamac — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:01:00 +0000

I certainly understand the sentiment, especially from the practicality and budgetary position. However, rovers and sensors can’t replace human observation and, even though much of the science can be done remotely, human experience still has power that even something as cool as Curiosity can’t provide.

By: SedanChair

SedanChair — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:00:00 +0000

It’s 2012, we were supposed to be able to take a freaking cab to the moon by now

By: noah saber freedman

noah saber freedman — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 14:49:00 +0000

government can absorb the risk of lunar/martian missions in a way that corporate enterprise cannot – yet.

By: bill_mcgonigle

bill_mcgonigle — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 14:48:00 +0000

Sounds like wishful thinking, unless Obama is intending to JFK his legacy. Yeah, sue me, I verbed JFK.

By: BonzoDog1

BonzoDog1 — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 14:37:00 +0000

Man-in-space is so 1960s — and so expensive.
But NASA continues to see it as an essential part of the PR campaign for taxpayer funding.
Every dime and every launch-ounce invested in keeping a human alive is a drain on achieving mission goals that can be done remotely.

By: Romeo Vitelli

Romeo Vitelli — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 14:26:00 +0000

They can’t just wait and hitch a ride with Elon Musk?

By: John Fleming

John Fleming — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 14:26:00 +0000

Cue the Newt Gingrich jokes…

All kidding aside, this is wonderful news. I hope it’s the beginning of a permanent human presence on the Moon.