User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:18:37 PM EDT
"President Donald Trump on Monday will sign a directive aimed at sending Americans back to the moon and eventually to Mars, the White House said. Trump will sign “Space Policy Directive 1” that orders NASA “to lead an innovative space exploration program to send American astronauts back to the Moon, and eventually Mars,” spokesman Hogan Gidley said.
Gidley said Trump’s move is based on recommendations from the National Space Council. “He will change our nation’s human spaceflight policy to help America become the driving force for the space industry, gain new knowledge from the cosmos, and spur incredible technology,” Gidley said in a statement." https://www.reuters.com ETA: Still not tired of winning 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:21:26 PM EDT
[#1]
I hope the US claims Mars
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:22:17 PM EDT
[#2]
About time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:22:32 PM EDT
[#3]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:23:19 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope the US claims Mars |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:23:50 PM EDT
[#5]
I am all for this. Funding for NASA was cut severely under the Kenyan. Space be important yo.
MAGA |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:24:23 PM EDT
[#6]
Clearly, The Man.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:26:48 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope the US claims Mars |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:28:07 PM EDT
[#8]
I hope that Trump does bring us back into space, but this order doesn’t really do anything by itself. He’s setting the right goal, but he needs to coordinate with NASA about what programs they actually need resources for in order to accomplish that and to secure Congress’ support.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:41:17 PM EDT
[#9]
So enlighten me as to what we are cutting in order to make this economically feasible? Adding more to the national debt in order to skip around on the moon is not what we need right now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:42:20 PM EDT
[#10]
And then when the next democrat is elected they will shut down everything due to "cost" and nasa will be back to researching global warming.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:43:59 PM EDT
[#11]
Hopefully this plan follows the Commercial crew/cargo model rather than SLS.
Send out a bid for "Commercial Moon" and let SpaceX, Blue Origin, and ULA bid for it. If it uses SLS this plan is already DOA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:45:05 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So enlighten me as to what we are cutting in order to make this economically feasible? Adding more to the national debt in order to skip around on the moon is not what we need right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:45:24 PM EDT
[#13]
Is NASA even a good choice to give money to? It's wasteful and inefficient. Open up competition and stand back.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:48:37 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So enlighten me as to what we are cutting in order to make this economically feasible? Adding more to the national debt in order to skip around on the moon is not what we need right now. We spend $4 billion a year on SLS + Orion, the rocket to nowhere. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:49:40 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So enlighten me as to what we are cutting in order to make this economically feasible? Adding more to the national debt in order to skip around on the moon is not what we need right now. ETA: apparently I am too dumb to post YouTube videos 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:50:03 PM EDT
[#16]
Deport ALL Martians! They have to go back.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:52:22 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hopefully this plan follows the Commercial crew/cargo model rather than SLS. Send out a bid for "Commercial Moon" and let SpaceX, Blue Origin, and ULA bid for it. If it uses SLS this plan is already DOA. I don't think manned exploration should be our priority in space at this time either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 1:55:14 PM EDT
[#18]
Moon first. Permanant base on Moon to facilitate Asteroid belt mining and processing of minerals then Mars.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:01:51 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd settle for a permanent Moon base first. absolutely no atmosphere everything has to be a pressure vessel extreme low gravity radiation temperature differentials micro meteor hazards regolith sticks to everything and is carcinogenic just to name a few a moon base would need to be under ground with minimal activity on the surface |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:03:08 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am all for this. Funding for NASA was cut severely under the Kenyan. Space be important yo. MAGA W shouted for Mars too while killing the STS replacement program. Let's see if Trumps shouting is backed by actual funding. I doubt it. Congress doesn't give two shits about the NASA goal. They only care about $ spent in their district. I don't really care about the moon. I want to see NASA proiritize and achieve over the next 15 years: 1. Dusty Plasma Fission Fragment Propulsion 2. Nuclear gas core reactors to power VASIMR 3. Manned missions to asteroids and Mars (Requires #2) 4. Asteroid/Comet Redirect Mission (Requires #1/#2) 5. Launch landers for Europa, Callisto, Titan, and Enceladus (requires #1) If NASA funded those missions while using private sector launch systems to get them out of atmo, that would be the optimal way to go. I'd support 2% of the federal budget for that instead of the 0.5% NASA has been getting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:07:44 PM EDT
[#21]
Is it too soon to complain about Liberals screaming that we will cause "Climate Change" on the Moon and Mars?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:08:34 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is it too soon to complain about Liberals screaming that we will cause "Climate Change" on the Moon and Mars? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:10:10 PM EDT
[#23]
He should immediately declare his intention to immortalize Hilary Clinton by making her the first woman on Mars.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:15:34 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He should immediately declare his intention to immortalize Hilary Clinton by making her the first woman on Mars. Sometimes I picture GD posters sitting hunched over their computer in mom's basement with a bud light an two sticky notes on their aging CRT monitor. One reads "FBHO," the other reads "FHRC." A thread about going back to space and the replies we get are, "the Kenyan was a bad bad man" and "what if instead of locking her up, we shot her into space?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:18:04 PM EDT
[#25]
Praise Kek, heavy judger of evil cucks.
I must go groom this MAGA boner some before it is the death of me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:19:51 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You could probably cut SLS & Orion, and send out a "commercial moon" program without changing the budget at all. We spend $4 billion a year on SLS + Orion, the rocket to nowhere. I grew up around the STS. I remember when I was anti-SpaceX and anti-Blue Origin and was pissed about Orion/SLS .gov cheese not being a real priority after each STS-follow-on was cut by each admin. I was WRONG. Lift systems should (now) be private sector. Deep space should be .gov (for now) We have seen where .gov investment helps society is payoff of long term advanced R&D... both in terms of tech trickle down and market creation. The result of .gov lift systems in the past is that there is now a market for lift systems! Imagine what the market will be for deep space if we actually get out there? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:23:44 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually it increased under Obummer $wise, holding steady %wise despite federal dollars being redirected elsewhere. W shouted for Mars too while killing the STS replacement program. Let's see if Trumps shouting is backed by actual funding. I doubt it. Congress doesn't give two shits about the NASA goal. They only care about $ spent in their district. I don't really care about the moon. I want to see NASA proiritize and achieve over the next 15 years: 1. Dusty Plasma Fission Fragment Propulsion 2. Nuclear gas core reactors to power VASIMR 3. Manned missions to asteroids and Mars (Requires #2) 4. Asteroid/Comet Redirect Mission (Requires #1/#2) 5. Launch landers for Europa, Callisto, Titan, and Enceladus (requires #1) If NASA funded those missions while using private sector launch systems to get them out of atmo, that would be the optimal way to go. I'd support 2% of the federal budget for that instead of the 0.5% NASA has been getting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:25:26 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So enlighten me as to what we are cutting in order to make this economically feasible? Adding more to the national debt in order to skip around on the moon is not what we need right now. All the necessary science and and should be done by robots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:26:14 PM EDT
[#29]
I like the idea of a permanent base on the moon, which can then be used to launch further into space. Plus I want star wars back and I want some secret but serious weapons on the moon
But I do support the private sector being able to bid on launching all of this, plus I'd love to see the private sector for space industries majorly grow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:27:50 PM EDT
[#30]
I fully support the President in this endeavor.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:30:19 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope the US claims Mars |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:34:07 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. It's a total waste of money and the original moon landings were more to score political points and bragging rights. There was never any real scientific reason to send humans there or anywhere else. All the necessary science and and should be done by robots. After a few hundred years, European powers, who decided that such an endeavor wasn't a waste of money began landing on Chinese shores and setting up colonies at will after conquering most of the known world with their navies and advanced technology. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:34:22 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Might as well go full torchship and see if the Zubrin Nuclear Salt Water Rocket, or something along those lines, is realistic. We have testbed space reactors, although not gas core. We have a working testbed VASIMR. NSWR is an interesting idea, but research is not as advanced and it is a harder to sell and much costlier. NSWR uses extremely expensive combined fuel/reaction mass. If we wanted to go interstellar, it might be the ticket, but we have a lot of stuff to do in the solar system first. VASIMR and FFRE at lower estimates of Isp are >= a NSWR at theoretical max Isp. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:35:09 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the moon is a much much more hazardous environment for humans than mars absolutely no atmosphere everything has to be a pressure vessel extreme low gravity radiation temperature differentials micro meteor hazards regolith sticks to everything and is carcinogenic just to name a few a moon base would need to be under ground with minimal activity on the surface Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I'd settle for a permanent Moon base first. absolutely no atmosphere everything has to be a pressure vessel extreme low gravity radiation temperature differentials micro meteor hazards regolith sticks to everything and is carcinogenic just to name a few a moon base would need to be under ground with minimal activity on the surface |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:37:10 PM EDT
[#35]
Good. Our instinct to explore is part of what keeps us advancing as a species, and really doesn't need any justification beyond "we wanted to see what was there".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:37:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Moon first. Permanant base on Moon to facilitate Asteroid belt mining and processing of minerals then Mars. Which minerals are currently cost feasible to extract that way? (significantly cheaper than earth-mining), where are they/which asteroids, and what does the price have to be to make them profitable for the level of risk involved? Remember, there's a shit ton of oil on earth that oil companies know exactly where it is but don't bother extracting... yet. The price dictates which oil gets extracted first. We don't even have all the necessary technologies developed to perform asteroid mining. I have no doubt we'll develop them when the time comes. But who should decide when the time is right? The market or government? Government's track record at these kinds of things generally sucks ass. Government is the only business in the world that gets to avoid going out of business by threatening to shoot you if you don't do business with them. Well... almost the only business that does that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:39:14 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Correct, which means lots of mining and other construction that's just not realistic imo. Mars makes more sense, there is an atmosphere, closer to Earths gravity and a small amount of water left. My question is what happened to the Martian core? What caused the planet to lose it's magnetic field? (As I understand it, it has and that's why the solar winds are slowly but continuously stripping away it's atmosphere) We think Mars's core cooled radiatively because the planet is smaller. (Unless you believe the very center few miles of Earth's core is a giant U fission reactor in which case one could argue that perhaps Mars had far less U). |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:40:44 PM EDT
[#38]
No sense in worrying about space when we can’t even send the illegals back.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:42:18 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. It's a total waste of money and the original moon landings were more to score political points and bragging rights. There was never any real scientific reason to send humans there or anywhere else. All the necessary science and and should be done by robots. Look at a picture of the Grand Canyon, then go there, stand on the edge and see it with your own eyes. Then tell us again how there's no reason for man to experience things firsthand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:43:24 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We don't even have all the necessary technologies developed to perform asteroid mining. I have no doubt we'll develop them when the time comes. But who should decide when the time is right? The market or government? Government's track record at these kinds of things generally sucks ass. Government is the only business in the world that gets to avoid going out of business by threatening to shoot you if you don't do business with them. Well... almost the only business that does that. However, the government currently has other reasons to pursue R&D now. The ability to redirect an asteroid for mining means we can redirect a killer asteroid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:43:45 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No sense in worrying about space when we can’t even send the illegals back. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:46:27 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd settle for a permanent Moon base first. Moon base is a necessary step if we ever get off this rock. Also he who owns the moon controls earth as far as i understand. Sits at the top of our gravity well and can drop little presents down to us with impunity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:50:22 PM EDT
[#43]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:51:17 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In general, but where the .gov investment is useful is extremely long lead ROI R&D. The market sucks at long eyed R&D. By the time scarcity raised prices to push R&D investment into asteroid mining in a private sector that doesn't like to look more than 7 years ahead, the cost of materials require to initiate may have also risen above practical levels to pursue the R&D. However, the government currently has other reasons to pursue R&D now. The ability to redirect an asteroid for mining means we can redirect a killer asteroid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining Scroll down to companies and organizations. If NASA or the European Space Agency are doing any research in this area, they're being pretty quiet about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:51:34 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: X100,000 Moon base is a necessary step if we ever get off this rock. Also he who owns the moon controls earth as far as i understand. Sits at the top of our gravity well and can drop little presents down to us with impunity. and No |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:52:15 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So enlighten me as to what we are cutting in order to make this economically feasible? Adding more to the national debt in order to skip around on the moon is not what we need right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:52:45 PM EDT
[#47]
He's gonna rerun the movie "Roots" backwards.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:52:52 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If we want to mine, asteroids are what we mine. You only mine in a gravity well if you plan to use that shit in the gravity well (or if you can't find something outside of a gravity well). We think Mars's core cooled radiatively because the planet is smaller. (Unless you believe the very center few miles of Earth's core is a giant U fission reactor in which case one could argue that perhaps Mars had far less U). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Correct, which means lots of mining and other construction that's just not realistic imo. Mars makes more sense, there is an atmosphere, closer to Earths gravity and a small amount of water left. My question is what happened to the Martian core? What caused the planet to lose it's magnetic field? (As I understand it, it has and that's why the solar winds are slowly but continuously stripping away it's atmosphere) We think Mars's core cooled radiatively because the planet is smaller. (Unless you believe the very center few miles of Earth's core is a giant U fission reactor in which case one could argue that perhaps Mars had far less U). |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:53:12 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Except that it's private companies currently doing the prelim R&D to do the things we're talking about. Not government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining Scroll down to companies and organizations. If NASA or the European Space Agency are doing any research in this area, they're being pretty quiet about it. ESA did do the Rosetta comet lander mission which as a necessary stepping stone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2017 2:54:45 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope the US claims Mars |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File