Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Saru

Will NASA asteroid mission be cancelled ?

63 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

As a previous poster pointed out, if we could perfect the technology first with an established colony on our own satellite, perhaps eventually capturing an asteroid later would be more efficient. We would benefit from such an approach imo.

Why do we require NASA and tax dollars to do that? The reality is that there are limited dollars and corporate america is going there anyways so do the high science thing.

Edited by Merc14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we require NASA and tax dollars to do that? The reality is that there are limited dollars and corporate america is going there anyways so do the high science thing.

For most of nasa's life, it has returned three dollars for ever one given. Not sure if that holds true right now with usd payig russia to take us to the station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You read my mind. Perhaps that 3+Billion/year to Israel should be going to much greater causes... That's just my opinion, though.

While I'd like NASA to be able to do both, where do you suggest the money comes from? I'm sure the Republicans will kick in their fair share since they want NASA to go to the moon. :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about we avoid bring off topic Middle-Eastern politics into this and actually discuss NASA's future.

I wasn't bringing anything off topic to discussion. How about I speak whatever's on my mind; whether you like it or not. Taking 3+Billion/year and giving it to NASA is surely a discussion of its future. Yes, cancel the asteroid mission, and begin a moon base. Happy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you guys remember airport 2. They were using a nasa style shuttle to take passengers to the moon. That isn't to far off from what we need for a three day trip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

For most of nasa's life, it has returned three dollars for ever one given. Not sure if that holds true right now with usd payig russia to take us to the station.

What does Russia taking astronauts to the ISS have to do with what I said? NASA is developing a new capsule (you can see the escape tower test vehicle at the Virginia Air and Space Center) and it would carry us to the asteroid to collect samples. Harvesting asteroids could prove to be very profitable if you could fine one loaded with exotic metals.

Edited by Merc14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A mission like this could get canceled, and we have a probe circling the moon that's about to celebrate its 4th anniversary in orbit.

NASA should be the poster child for the term, "Misappropriation of Funds".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be cancelled and looked at further down in the future, but not at this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Surely all this planning and cancelling is just setting them back from any kind of mission for many more years.

I think it has finally sunk in that NASA is falling behind the Russians and Chinese in manned space missions at an alarming rate.

I cannot believe a manned space station on the moon is economically feasible at the moment. I have no doubt they can build one and get it there, then man it. But maintaining it after would be a huge commitment for many years to come. Nasa, ESA and Russians are struggling with the international space station financially, imagine how much more it would cost to resupply a moon base. How many launches from Earth did it take to build it?

Edited by skookum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nasa is struggleing because their budget keeps getting cut, do to the people thinking the money should be spent sending tanks and fighters and cash to an enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nasa is struggleing because their budget keeps getting cut, do to the people thinking the money should be spent sending tanks and fighters and cash to an enemy.

Agreed, but they have also run up a national debt that is almost impossible to service. Until this is tackled I can't see NASA ever getting a budget like it did with the first moon landings,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I can't see why we want to explore a floating rock. We should have a moon base and should have started building one on the 70s. Asteroid mission is completely pointless.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nasa is struggleing because their budget keeps getting cut, do to the people thinking the money should be spent sending tanks and fighters and cash to an enemy.

I wonder if you know what proportion of the US's spending is on the military and what is on entitlements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I can't see why we want to explore a floating rock. We should have a moon base and should have started building one on the 70s. Asteroid mission is completely pointless.

A bit of a "know-nothing" attitude (glib and ignorant).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does Russia taking astronauts to the ISS have to do with what I said? NASA is developing a new capsule (you can see the escape tower test vehicle at the Virginia Air and Space Center) and it would carry us to the asteroid to collect samples. Harvesting asteroids could prove to be very profitable if you could fine one loaded with exotic metals.

What does Russia taking astronauts to the ISS have to do with what I said? NASA is developing a new capsule (you can see the escape tower test vehicle at the Virginia Air and Space Center) and it would carry us to the asteroid to collect samples. Harvesting asteroids could prove to be very profitable if you could fine one loaded with exotic metals.

Do you want to spend six months inside a capsule with up to six others with you. I know I wouldn't. I might have a problem for three days. Six months to mars, one year on the ground and six months home. Three days to the moon and three days back.

No, to do any mission beyond the moon. We will need a true space ship, something built in space. We could use the capsule as the command capsule. This ship will need radiation shielding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you want to spend six months inside a capsule with up to six others with you. I know I wouldn't. I might have a problem for three days. Six months to mars, one year on the ground and six months home. Three days to the moon and three days back.

No, to do any mission beyond the moon. We will need a true space ship, something built in space. We could use the capsule as the command capsule. This ship will need radiation shielding.

I agree that a capsule makes any Mars trip a one way deal but if getting to Mars via a ship built on the moon is the ultimate goal then they had better learn how to mine asteroids because the materials to build this ship aren't all available on the moon. Anyways, you are missing my point which is that industry is perfectly capable of and is now willing to explore and exploit the moon's resources. Why, then, should NASA spend its resources on doing the same thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The moon has the same stuff earth has including water. The gold on earth was brought by meteors, since the moon has taken more hits than us it should have gold too. But, using our current tech it isn't worth the trouble to mine it. If you take as loaf of bread into orbit, then turned itti gold it wouldn't pay for the trip. This is from nasa. We need reusable landers and launchers with engines that don't need to be refilled after every trip. That might be a nuclear engine. But, too many would worry it might blow up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand wanting to go to a near asteroid, especially for mining purposes. Acquiring precious or even unknown metals! I also think it very awesome to have a moon base of some sort. In hopes that everyone could get a chance to visit, not just privileged individuals. I do believe money plays such a big role in all this that we do not need to do either of the two as of this point in time. Let's take care of some more things down here on Earth first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we start putting families on board a satilite. We will need dirt more than anything lse except water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It occurs to me that more research on the problems of living in isolated environments may be needed. The one experiment I'm aware of failed, but it struck me as mainly hype anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It occurs to me that more research on the problems of living in isolated environments may be needed. The one experiment I'm aware of failed, but it struck me as mainly hype anyway.

The experament didn't fail. The people did. They forgot to close a door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote Moon base first, gold mining ( or anything else) on an asteroid later. and I have to agree there has to be something valuable on the moon that could be mined before we start on the asteroids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well human error is the cause of most experimental failures.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote Moon base first, gold mining ( or anything else) on an asteroid later. and I have to agree there has to be something valuable on the moon that could be mined before we start on the asteroids.

I don't perceive moon mining because of the cost of getting the stuff back to the earth. When self-sustaining colonies are on the moon, then of course mining will happen to help maintain them rather than transporting everything from the earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

IF we are going to populate the rest of this solar system ( which seems to be a goal for some people) we will have to learn to mine in space eventually, if for no other reason than raw materials for building. Our planet cannot sustain being stripped of it's resources for bases on other planets, and the logistics & costs of transportation is just as bad as ( and maybe worse than)what was just mentioned by frank. IF we can get a moon base up and running as a long term colony style base, then there is a base to learn to mine in space. it's not going to be any harder getting whatever might be mined back from the moon as it would from some asteroid in the belt between mars and Jupiter, most likely not as hard and less expensive due to the distances involved. and the translation/transportation from space to earth will be just as hard and just as expensive regardless where it was shipped from. we need someplace to learn these things and a working moon base is the first step. So again I say, I vote Moon base first, gold mining ( or anything else) on an asteroid later. I have to agree with one of the previous posts in that there has to be something valuable on the moon that could be mined before we start on the asteroids. Even if that value is only learning the knowledge of how to do it correctly. In my mind A Moon Base is... has to be the first/next step. As to whether or not it ever happens???........

Edited by mysticwerewolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.