Blue Origin-led 'National Team' delivers mock-up moon lander to NASA for tests

Wolfshadw

Moderator
Apr 1, 2020
496
437
1,060
I still think they're going about this the wrong way. I mean, I get it. You don't spend billions of dollars sending equipment to the moon if you can't get people there to use it, but we've already done "to the moon and back". We've done it half a dozen times. We don't need to prove that we can still do it. If you really want to establish a long term, human presence on the moon, you need to take a leap of faith and get your support systems up there first. Make sure they're tested and operating to capacity. Then you can start sending people to occupy the place.

I still do not understand why Antarctica is not being used as a proving ground for such missions.

-Wolf sends

Edit: I'll have to remember to ask @DrJoePesce if he visits again
 
Last edited:
Dec 21, 2019
8
2
515
I still think they're going about this the wrong way. I mean, I get it. You don't spend billions of dollars sending equipment to the moon if you can't get people there to use it, but we've already done "to the moon and back". We've done it half a dozen times. We don't need to prove that we can still do it. If you really want to establish a long term, human presence on the moon, you need to take a leap of faith and get your support systems up there first. Make sure they're tested and operating to capacity. Then you can start sending people to occupy the place.

I still do not understand why Antarctica is not being used as a proving ground for such missions.

-Wolf sends

Edit: I'll have to remember to ask @DrJoePesce if he visits again
Antarctica is just too remote a place for testing it is that simple. O2 and water are no concern but things like food and internet etc. are hard to control. What happens if a storm blows in leaving people stranded and all? How do we get them back? I am being sarcastic but this could be the real reason. Cheers!
 
Aug 21, 2020
1
1
15
I still do not understand why Antarctica is not being used as a proving ground for such missions.
Because Antarctica is nothing like the moon. No water, no snow or surface ice, no wind, no penguins on the moon.
No dangerous radiation, no dusty regolith, no vacuum, no baking temperatures in the sun, no microgravity in Antarctica
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lovethrust
May 31, 2020
14
9
15
markjohnstone.co.uk
I`ve looked at all of the landers and I'm really surprised by there size. The National Team and SpaceX will both have to use long ladders or lifts to get the astronauts to the surface, this is a huge risk. All of these systems look really complicated and expensive. It would be easier to build smaller landers, base them at the gateway station. Make there fuel system modular which makes replenishment easier. We need to be able to reuse the landers in the same way SpaceX can reuse there Falcon9 boosters. SpaceX lunar lander seems to meet that requirement. I cant see that in the other concepts.

But we need to go back to the moon, if we had continued with Apollo, we could have had a base on the moon by now. Private companies are leading the way.
 
Last edited:
Apr 7, 2020
159
28
110
I think the Atacama desert in Chile would be about the closest you could get to a lunar environment. It’s high, dry (very, very dry) and cloudless...

Even mountains in the 20,000+ foot range have no glaciers on top.
Plus there is some infrastructure to get there.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY