Buzz Aldrin's Radical Plan For NASA 519
FleaPlus writes "Apollo 11 astronaut (and MIT Astronautics Sc.D.) Buzz Aldrin suggests a bolder plan for NASA (while still remaining within its budget), which he will present to the White House's Augustine Commission; he sees NASA heading down the wrong path with a 'rehash of what we did 40 years ago' which could derail future exploration and settlement. For the short-term, Aldrin suggests canceling NASA's troubled and increasingly costly Ares I, instead launching manned capsules on commercial Delta IV, Atlas V, and/or SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets. In the medium-term, NASA should return to the moon with an international consortium, with the ultimate goal of commercial lunar exploitation in mind. Aldrin's long term plan includes a 2018 comet flyby, a 2019 manned trip to a near-earth asteroid, a 2025 trip to the Martian moon Phobos, and one-way trips to colonize Mars."
Where are my mod points (Score:3, Informative)
Parent nailed it.
Re:Oh and one final thing.... (Score:5, Informative)
Since I had to look it up: [wikipedia.org]
Most astronauts have refused to grant him interviews due to his questionable tactics used in attempts to obtain footage of them confessing to being conspirators in a hoax. The most infamous incident involved Apollo 11 crew member Buzz Aldrin, the second man to walk on the moon. According to Aldrin, he was lured to a Beverly Hills hotel under the pretext of an interview on space for a Japanese children's television show. When he arrived, Aldrin claims Sibrel was there demanding that he swear on a Bible that he had walked on the moon.
When Aldrin refused, Sibrel called him a coward, a liar, and a thief. Aldrin punched Sibrel in the jaw and the incident was captured on video. Sibrel later attempted to use the tape to convince police and prosecutors that he was the victim of an assault. However, it was decided that Aldrin had been provoked, and did not actually injure Sibrel, and so no charges were filed. Many talk show hosts aired the clip.
Re:Good ideas. (Score:5, Informative)
Most Americans also believe we should increase spending on NASA.
http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/01/10/bad-and-good-news-about-public-support-for-space/ [spacepolitics.com]
If we spent as much on space exploration as we did on the military or on bank bailouts for just one year we would have an endowment capable of funding permanent bases on the moon and robotic development of Mars.
Re:I trust the man (Score:3, Informative)
This has a different POV on it:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/firstonthemoon.html [badastronomy.com]
Re:Oh and one final thing.... (Score:5, Informative)
... and just to make sure everybody's curiousity is satisfied:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaUqaVj51w4 [youtube.com]
Sometimes violence is the answer...
Re:Good ideas. (Score:2, Informative)
GP was probably referring to 99942 Apophis [wikipedia.org], which is expected to pass within geosynchronous orbit on April 13, 2029.
Re:Good ideas. (Score:5, Informative)
Have you looked into the matter of WHY ? Without giving away too much, when you research the matter, you'll run into interesting terms like obstructionism, turf protection, pork politics, ITAR, entrenched interests and common misconceptions, perpetuated by certain groups and so on.
Nevertheless, there are several companies currently on track to start operating manned spaceflight vehicles, and when commercially successful with orbital versions thereof later. SpaceX is shooting for manned orbital from the get-go, with or without government subsidies.
and really struggles with unmanned ones.
Huh ?? Do you have any idea about the volume of the global commercial launch market, every year ? It isnt a "programme", as you put it. It a transportation market like any other. Currently with military lineage going back to ICBMs, but commercial market nevertheless.
What do you mean by "really struggles" ?
Re:for what purpose? To mess up the moon? (Score:2, Informative)
Please Moon is 8*10^22 kg. Suppose we remove 10 tons a second from the moon. Then after 1 million year we'll have removed 10^6*10^4*356*86400kg
ie 3,1586*10^17 kg i.e nothing. Even if we mine it at this rate till sun explodes, we'll only have removed 1.2*10^21kg, this is less than 2% of the mass of the moon with ridiculously optimistic mining efficiency and with a ridiculous timespan.
In conclusion, it's not because the moon looks small in the sky that it is. Get a sense of scales. Do you think it's possible for human beings to level Mount Everest ? The moon is much bigger. It'll stay there.
Re:No Australians on Mars... (Score:2, Informative)
Yeah, but the first 100 years or so really sucked, especially if you were a convict. Some of the penal settlements like Norfolk Island were so inhumanly run that inmates killed themselves, or in the case of Irish Catholics who believed that you went to hell if you killed yourself, drew straws and picked someone to be killed so they'd be sent to the mainland for trial. Just so they'd get out of there. Ever read The Fatal Shore? It is a really fascinating book about the founding of Australia.
Re:About time we had some public debate (Score:2, Informative)
"The reason" is hardly accurate. It was voted through by a large group of humans with many differing agendae, and while there were doubtless many who were convinced by the military side, there were also those who genuinely favoured the aspiration to greatness. And I know for a fact that most of those presently working at NASA are doing so for those reasons, not the military benefits.
If it was about "aspiring to greatness" why would the russians break their back trying to keep up with it?
Oh, yeah, I forgot, the Russians aren't allowed to aspire. They barely get to count as humans, really.
Re:Good ideas. (Score:3, Informative)