LCROSS Did Find Water!!

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HopDavid

Guest
SpaceTas":1uy0anap said:
It would be far easier, less exciting, to have a tele-operator(s) (the 1 sec delay is not too bad) running the diggers, water extractors and fuel makers. The operators could be sitting in a nice comfortable office drinking their favorite cup of joe, breathing free air, ordering in pizza, and just be able to flush the toilet.

You'd still need a repair crew every now and then, to go visit the moon. But the astronauts could spend their time exploring.

For me, tele operated diggers would be a more exciting way to extract in situ resources. It is more exciting to me because it seems more affordable and sustainable.

A more practical path for us getting there and staying there.
 
C

cyclonebuster

Guest
HopDavid":1n891idm said:
SpaceTas":1n891idm said:
It would be far easier, less exciting, to have a tele-operator(s) (the 1 sec delay is not too bad) running the diggers, water extractors and fuel makers. The operators could be sitting in a nice comfortable office drinking their favorite cup of joe, breathing free air, ordering in pizza, and just be able to flush the toilet.

You'd still need a repair crew every now and then, to go visit the moon. But the astronauts could spend their time exploring.

For me, tele operated diggers would be a more exciting way to extract in situ resources. It is more exciting to me because it seems more affordable and sustainable.

A more practical path for us getting there and staying there.

To many equpiment malfunctions will happen we need to be there to repair them.
 
T

thebigcat

Guest
Nuke the moon!

jk ;)

The whole thing seemed to me to have the feel of a publicity stunt. I mean, when Mike Golic and Mike Greenberg are talking about the impact on their show on ESPN2 and how they are disappointed that it didn't look as spectacular as the animation led them to believe it would be. Come on guys stick to a topic you barely know anything about: sports. :p

I had no doubt that water would be kicked up in the impact in quantity, the only question in my mind was how much. The reason is that on May 18th, 1910 the Earth and Moon passed through the tail of Halley's Comet, and the water ice in that crater has been sitting there for 99 years, nice and safe from the solar wind. Oops...did I just hear the scientific community let out a collective "D'OH!!!"

Yup. No great vast deposits of water ice just below the surface at the lunar poles waiting to sustain human colonists. But there might be enough on the floors of those permanently dark polar craters to make it viable, no great processing of rock to obtain water required.

Still, the whole show as a publicity stunt...Oddly I have no problem with that. Whatever it takes to get the general public behind us going back to the Moon, I'm all in favor of. It was inexpensive, throwing away stuff we had already used, or re-purposing if you prefer the term. The press has spent more money on column-inches for the story than NASA did on the re-purposing, animation and analysis of the impact. Nice feat that. :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts