Author Topic: Why we need to go back to the moon  (Read 80100 times)

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #20 on: 10/19/2009 07:43 pm »
The main reasons I think we need to return to the moon is the need for experience living on another planet. At this point we have exactly two weeks total time on another planetary body and that was about 40 years ago. This no were near enough to go heading off to mars.

The Moon provides an opportunity learn what we need to survive on Mars. Living on the Moon is harder than Mars and so if we can have a crew survive there for two yeas without re-supply then Mars will be do able. For example if we can maintain good health in the Moon’s 1/6 g then Mars’ 1/3 will not be a problem.

The Moon is a perfect test bed because it is so close. If a massive problem occurs on a moon base requiring evacuation, the crew can return to Earth any time it needs to, On Mars the crew would die. So lets learn to do it on the Moon where the risk to the crew is smaller. 


I like the goal to measure the effect of long duration at 1/6 G.  We have zero data on that.  We are talking some serious money to do that though.   A lo
t more than some sample returns.

Danny Deger

Edit: The anti-nuke crowd will love this one.  I understand the Apollo data on ringing the moon with the upperstage came back "strange".  We need to take a closer look at this.  We need to hit it harder to increase the signal to noise ratio to get better data.

We need a few unmanned mission to put some instruments in place and contract out to the Russians to ring the moon with one of their 25 megaton warheads.  That should ring it harder than an Apollo upperstage.   I don't think it would hurt the moon one bit.  I think it likes to be cratered actually.    It might be looking forward to its next big crater.
« Last Edit: 10/19/2009 07:44 pm by Danny Dot »
Danny Deger

Offline Launchpad911

  • Member
  • Posts: 61
  • Colorado
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #21 on: 10/19/2009 07:45 pm »
I don't know the average of the members here at NSF, but I am old enough (but not old at 53) to know that in my lifetime, there once was a time when Man had absolutely no idea what the back side of the Moon looked like. No idea at all. That doesn't sound like a very big deal until you finally have seen it and realize life will be different from now on.
I am also old enough now to know that the space race was a 98% political and 2% scientific endeavour. Frankly, I don't care that it was mostly political. We still got the job done and uncovered the mysteries like what the rest of the Moon looked like. Apollo amazed the world. Could we have done that with robots? Sure, but could a robot have read Genesis back to the Earth?
To me, the early space program was an example of what man (and government) can do when it wants to do something extraordinary.
Before I die, I would like to walk out into my backyard, look up at the Moon, and know that we are up there again.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 254
  • Likes Given: 457
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #22 on: 10/19/2009 07:48 pm »
Can we keep focused on "why" not "how"?  We have many places on this site on "how".

For example, what data do we need to answer which question that we still have about the moon. 

Danny Deger

Well operations on the moon can test NTR and NEP propulsion for interplanetary missions as well as ISRU.

On Mars these will have to work or else you loose a crew.
 But the moon is close enough you can afford to have an advanced propulsion system test or ISRU concept fail since Earth is only 3 days away.

It close and an easy target you could even do it using existing LVs if needed.

Ironically the existing EELVs and STS system actually have a larger throw over the course of a year then the Saturn V and IB did because of their higher potential flight rates.
9 for STS and 20 to 30 for both EELVs each carrying 20 to 30T.

You get around 780T throw a year twice the best Saturn V did assuming each EELV and shuttle carried 20T on average.

With upgrades to all vehicles and production/processing lines that probably can be nearly doubled esp if you had an Apollo era budget.

This is also why I suspected Griffin was a Mars first guy as you really don't need an HLV until you start considering a mission to Mars.
« Last Edit: 10/19/2009 07:52 pm by Patchouli »

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #23 on: 10/19/2009 07:51 pm »
Figure out and properly date the Late Heavy Bombardment. Look for traces of aminoacids in impact craters. Figure out at what time the aminoacid bearing impacts were. Statistically sample and date the impact craters to find the probabilty of impact events and if that has changed over time.

Lots of fun stuff to do. All this requires sample return, covering large areas and detailed mapping and observation to get the Lunar stratigraphy right. So in the long run cheaper to send people. There's why we should go back.

Would a core sample help?  Congress will throw money at NASA to do this if the Late Heavy Bombardment can be connected to our climate history.  I am thinking $30B will appear overnight to look at climate change.  I for one do not want to live through another ice age.  The last one was pretty bad.  I would much rather heat up a bit and have to move to Canada.

Danny Deger
Danny Deger

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #24 on: 10/19/2009 08:02 pm »
snip

Well operations on the moon can test NTR and NEP propulsion for interplanetary missions as well as ISRU.

snip


Three Mile Island kind of proved we shouldn't be allowed to play with nuclear reactors.  If that is the best we can do, we deserve to die because we have to produce CO2 to make electricity in a manner that we can power our cities. 

Maybe if we can operate one on the moon without melting it down then pumping the radioactive coolant outside of the containment vessel, the American public will allow us to make more on the Earth and make electricity with producing CO2.  Before we do this, we need to get a handle on climate change.  If we are headed into another ice age, we need all the CO2 we can produce.

What do you think we should make out of lunar material?  Oxygen for sure.  Mine for water if we find any, then we can make rocket fuel.  Have we found any decent metal ores yet?  How about a good iron ore you can throw straight into furnace like we used to? 

Danny Deger
« Last Edit: 10/19/2009 08:08 pm by Danny Dot »
Danny Deger

Offline agman25

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 452
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #25 on: 10/19/2009 08:03 pm »
Figure out and properly date the Late Heavy Bombardment. Look for traces of aminoacids in impact craters. Figure out at what time the aminoacid bearing impacts were. Statistically sample and date the impact craters to find the probabilty of impact events and if that has changed over time.

Lots of fun stuff to do. All this requires sample return, covering large areas and detailed mapping and observation to get the Lunar stratigraphy right. So in the long run cheaper to send people. There's why we should go back.

Would a core sample help?  Congress will throw money at NASA to do this if the Late Heavy Bombardment can be connected to our climate history.  I am thinking $30B will appear overnight to look at climate change.  I for one do not want to live through another ice age.  The last one was pretty bad.  I would much rather heat up a bit and have to move to Canada.

Danny Deger
Hard to stretch it to climate history. Origin of Life on Earth and protection of life on Earth will have to do.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 254
  • Likes Given: 457
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #26 on: 10/19/2009 08:07 pm »
Figure out and properly date the Late Heavy Bombardment. Look for traces of aminoacids in impact craters. Figure out at what time the aminoacid bearing impacts were. Statistically sample and date the impact craters to find the probabilty of impact events and if that has changed over time.

Lots of fun stuff to do. All this requires sample return, covering large areas and detailed mapping and observation to get the Lunar stratigraphy right. So in the long run cheaper to send people. There's why we should go back.

Would a core sample help?  Congress will throw money at NASA to do this if the Late Heavy Bombardment can be connected to our climate history.  I am thinking $30B will appear overnight to look at climate change.  I for one do not want to live through another ice age.  The last one was pretty bad.  I would much rather heat up a bit and have to move to Canada.

Danny Deger

The oldest Earth rocks and possible micro fossils might be found on the Moon of all places in the form of ejected into space from large impacts on Earth.

It also may be possible to get a record of past solar activity going back millions maybe even even billions of years from studying core samples of lunar regolith.
« Last Edit: 10/19/2009 08:08 pm by Patchouli »

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #27 on: 10/19/2009 08:13 pm »
snip
Hard to stretch it to climate history. Origin of Life on Earth and protection of life on Earth will have to do.

How do know heavy bombardment doesn't have an effect on our climate?  Maybe we need to look at the bombardment history to see if our climate history is correlated to our bombardment history.

Isn't there some theory that some ice ages were caused by bombardment?

Danny Deger
Danny Deger

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #28 on: 10/19/2009 08:15 pm »
snip
It also may be possible to get a record of past solar activity going back millions maybe even even billions of years from studying core samples of lunar regolith.

Sounds like lunar core samples to research climate change to me.

Danny Deger
Danny Deger

Offline veedriver22

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 268
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #29 on: 10/19/2009 08:29 pm »
There is now a moon version of google eath.  Have them search for sites that look interesting or might have resources.   Sim's are ok for a while but having them work with something thats real I think would be more exciting.   Also have a kids section of NASASPACEFLIGHT.COM where they can post & discuss their findings.  You would want teachers & scientists that would review thier topics & give them feedback on what they are seeing and suggestions on what to do next.

 Even cooler would be for NASA to actually select some of the sites that look promisiing.   Maybe a list of the promising sites and the kids that found them.

Sounds like we need a Space Act Agreement between NASA and Google.  Google can incorporate all the NASA data on the moon into the system.

Danny Deger
This is a great idea, something that NASA should do anyway. It'd be great publicity for Google (not like they need it), could be done with their "20% time," and would greatly increase the quality and accessibility of NASA's data. Of course, it must all be open-sourced.
The ideas on this keep flowing.  This might actually have legs.

   With this a teacher can tell their students that NASA is requesting their help to find exploration and resource sites on the moon. The teacher can work with the students to select some promising sites.  The teacher could then request more detail information from NASA.   NASA has lots more detail mapping and information on the moon surface than Google does.   The class could put in requests to NASA for this information.   This would be a great teaching tool.  The teacher would be able to teach about any number of subjects regarding the moon, its creation, its rotation, & so on to give clues to the students on where resources might be found.   Water is not the only thing they could look for.   

 Nasa would select the most promising sites and they could be posted to the web site listing the School , the teacher, and the students that had the biggest contribution to the  discovery.  I have to believe that some of the sites picked out might actually be explored by NASA at some point.   Can you image the excitement of knowing that its possible that your site might actually be explored some day (hopefully not too far away).   


Offline MrTim

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 731
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #30 on: 10/19/2009 08:34 pm »
Three Mile Island kind of proved we shouldn't be allowed to play with nuclear reactors.  If that is the best we can do, we deserve to die because we have to produce CO2 to make electricity in a manner that we can power our cities. 

Maybe if we can operate one on the moon without melting it down then pumping the radioactive coolant outside of the containment vessel, the American public will allow us to make more on the Earth and make electricity with producing CO2.  Before we do this, we need to get a handle on climate change.  If we are headed into another ice age, we need all the CO2 we can produce.

What do you think we should make out of lunar material?  Oxygen for sure.  Mine for water if we find any, then we can make rocket fuel.  Have we found any decent metal ores yet?  How about a good iron ore you can throw straight into furnace like we used to? 

Danny Deger
Sorry, Danny, but Three Mile Island only proved that poorly trained commercial operators 40-ish years ago using technology of that era could recklessly foul things up so badly that... well... nobody died.

I prefer to note that for about 50 years the US Navy has been training 20 year old kids to run reactors aboard pitching, rolling warships cruising in all weather conditions all around the world in all climates and in all that time they have never had such an incident. My bet is that if NASA operates nuclear power plants on the moon and/or nuclear engines for manned missions they will have an even better safety record than the Navy does; we certainly spend more time and money training those really smart people we call "astronauts".

Remember that in space exploration, as in many other areas, energy is everything. If you have a moonbase with a robust nuclear power supply then recycling air and water becomes easier, fabricating things from lunar soil (like structural elements for base construction) becomes easier, extracting resources from the regolith becomes easier, etc. With enough power and a proper design, lunar landers could be launched back up from the moon by a lunar catapault (reducing the need for ascent fuel, and making lander re-use even more practical). Given the power, you can afford to operate gardens in a moonbase to provide food (lowering resupply requirements while improving crew morale). You should be able to manufacture things you need either by sintering regolith in layers to make 3D parts (think lithography) or even by processing regolith to get blocks of material that are then CNC machined into parts as needed.

Just about everything that makes a moonbase expensive becomes cheaper if you have surplus power. As a result, we as a society need to accept the small risk just as weed do for naval vessels.

All these issues will be even more important for Mars, so we ought to start trying to sustain crews by using them on the moon where rescue/return home is possible if needed in the event that early systems fail. If we want to use nuclear power in low gravity on Mars someday, we ought to try surviving using it on the moon first.

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #31 on: 10/19/2009 08:37 pm »
snip

 Nasa would select the most promising sites and they could be posted to the web site listing the School , the teacher, and the students that had the biggest contribution to the  discovery.  I have to believe that some of the sites picked out might actually be explored by NASA at some point.   Can you image the excitement of knowing that its possible that your site might actually be explored some day (hopefully not too far away).   


I can tell you the kids I taught are very capable of asking good questions and thus picking out a good sight.  And don't forget they need to ask for what type of data they need and recommend how to get it.

On orbit measurements are in the mix. 

Danny Deger
Danny Deger

Offline cgrunska

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 248
  • Austin Tx
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #32 on: 10/19/2009 08:40 pm »
nuclear power, yes. It's asinine that we have shyd away from it for this long here on Earth.
I'd rather us build a nuclear powered spaceship than anything else at this point.
Anyway, someone mentioned looking up at the moon and knownig we are up there.

Imagine being an 8 year old and experiencing the same thing now days. The moon is a visible object to anyone on the planet. being able to look up at night and imagine what someone is doing up there would fill a child, or even an adult! with awe and wonder at what we can achieve.

that's an untangible benefit of any exploration program. I think the moon might impact people more though, just because it is visible

hard to sell that aspect to congress though i'd thin. unless you threw in math and science interests as well. But even then.

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #33 on: 10/19/2009 08:45 pm »
snip

I prefer to note that for about 50 years the US Navy has been training 20 year old kids to run reactors aboard pitching, rolling warships cruising in all weather conditions all around the world in all climates and in all that time they have never had such an incident. My bet is that if NASA operates nuclear power plants on the moon and/or nuclear engines for manned missions they will have an even better safety record than the Navy does; we certainly spend more time and money training those really smart people we call "astronauts".

snip


You are correct that the Navy is much better.  My brother was one of the 20 year old operators by the way.

And Three Mile Island had a serious design flaw.  It had a switch to automatically pump the containment vessel's sump dry if it got water in it.  This is how the radiation got out of the containment vessel. 

It was also operating with the backup cooling system off line -- which is a big time no-no.  The manager that made that decision to save a few bucks should have spent time in jail for endangering the public.  The errors by the operators were just one link in the chain.

Danny Deger

Edit: Here is a good first step.  NASA works with Google, other internet resources, NASA TV, and its existing educational out reach program to teach the kids everything we currently know about the moon and our climate history.  Then we have them vote if we need more data to answer some important questions they will still have.  The moon and our climate history are strange enough I know what the answer will be.
« Last Edit: 10/19/2009 09:05 pm by Danny Dot »
Danny Deger

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39443
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25546
  • Likes Given: 12224
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #34 on: 10/19/2009 08:47 pm »
nuclear power, yes. It's asinine that we have shyd away from it for this long here on Earth.
I'd rather us build a nuclear powered spaceship than anything else at this point.
Anyway, someone mentioned looking up at the moon and knownig we are up there.

Imagine being an 8 year old and experiencing the same thing now days. The moon is a visible object to anyone on the planet. being able to look up at night and imagine what someone is doing up there would fill a child, or even an adult! with awe and wonder at what we can achieve.

that's an untangible benefit of any exploration program. I think the moon might impact people more though, just because it is visible

hard to sell that aspect to congress though i'd thin. unless you threw in math and science interests as well. But even then.

I agree with the Moon being better for getting the public involved. Mars isn't visible for much of the year, and even then most people just look at it as a star in the sky. The Moon, on the other hand, is visible very often, even in the daytime. In my experience, everything besides the Moon is just an abstraction for most people, especially if they (like most of the world) live in a city. And even there, to show people the Moon through a telescope evokes quite a reaction.

If any of you guys want to build public support for any spaceflight at all, it's a good idea to show your friends and neighbors the Moon and planets first hand through a telescope. Many of them barely believe other planets exist at all. This last Saturday night, I showed at least thirty different people (mostly university students, middle-aged upper-middle-class white people, and East African immigrants) Jupiter and its moons. They all smiled. Many of them expressed disbelief when I said, "Hey, do you want to look at Jupiter through this telescope?" and then pointed at the dot in the sky.
« Last Edit: 10/19/2009 09:32 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 254
  • Likes Given: 457
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #35 on: 10/19/2009 11:53 pm »
snip

Well operations on the moon can test NTR and NEP propulsion for interplanetary missions as well as ISRU.

snip


Three Mile Island kind of proved we shouldn't be allowed to play with nuclear reactors.  If that is the best we can do, we deserve to die because we have to produce CO2 to make electricity in a manner that we can power our cities. 


Danny Deger

I'm shocked to have gotten such a misinformed statement from an aerospace engineer.

No one was harmed by three mile island the containment systems did their job.

If anything it showed the stark differences between a western reactor and those developed in the former Soviet union.

All that was released was 2kg of xenon gas largely harmless as it dissipated and was not a bone seeking element like Cesium or Strontium Chernobyl released.

Newer third and forth generation reactors such as those used on spacecraft will be even safer.

The anti nuclear stance is one of my largest gripes with the green community.
They complain of global warming yet will not accept the only existing carbon neutral energy source that can be used for baseline power.
The issue is you can use only so much wind and solar power on the grid about 30% due to the variability of these sources.
Besides ever consider what gets released into the atmosphere from coal ?
Or how it's poisoning sea food with mercury which about 30% of the earth's population depends on for their primary source of protein or how many deaths occur in coal mines?
 
If we can't learn to go beyond fear mongering by the media and make judgments based on facts then we do not deserve to explore space.
I'm probably one of the younger people here but I do already know that 90% of what the mainstream media says is usually an exaggeration or even an out right fib.

Besides solar panels won't get you to Mars in 3 to 4 months nor will they get you to Jupiter and back.
Judging from the MER data they may not even keep you alive on Mars for up to two years.
A Mars hab can't power down 90% of it's systems and ride a dust storm out like a robot because of this little issue it has to keep the crew alive.
« Last Edit: 10/20/2009 12:08 am by Patchouli »

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #36 on: 10/20/2009 12:29 am »
The big problem with Three Mile Island I think was the lack of information during and before.  The people living close by were in a state of panic and the mistakes made and the design flaws uncovered were not admitted to.  It is a matter of trust, not engineering.

At the time, my brother, who was a an nuclear reactor operator for the Navy even was not allowed to learn what happened.  It is only recently the truth of the accident has come out.  In the long run it is good news because it is probably good to show it was as bad as it can get, and next time we won't pump the radioactive water out of the containment vessel with a poorly designed automatic sump pump in the containment vessel.   Otherwise we could proudly say we pretty much had a complete melt down and it was contained as we designed it to be.  It could have been worse if some operator hadn't realized a pump was taking the radio active water outside.

In the airline industry the results of an accident investigation are published in detail and the public is told what actions are taking place to assure them it is not going to happen again.

Danny Deger
« Last Edit: 10/20/2009 01:09 am by Danny Dot »
Danny Deger

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17940
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 661
  • Likes Given: 7794
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #37 on: 10/20/2009 12:40 am »
To me, a great idea would be teleoperated robotic rovers on the Moon that kids could run from their classrooms via the internet. Heck, I'd go back to school for a chance to use that!


Capital idea!

One mission, multiplexed solar powered rovers, with a little digging arm and a random assortment of sensors to give schools different & challenging tasks. Maybe even make it a competition.

Perhaps to save money, they could piggy-back on a main rover mission, using a common hub for data relay purposes.

Let's face it, the educational value would go very far. Winners would get a chance to operate the MSL. Runnres up: Opportunity.  :)

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2793
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #38 on: 10/20/2009 01:07 am »
To me, a great idea would be teleoperated robotic rovers on the Moon that kids could run from their classrooms via the internet. Heck, I'd go back to school for a chance to use that!


Capital idea!

One mission, multiplexed solar powered rovers, with a little digging arm and a random assortment of sensors to give schools different & challenging tasks. Maybe even make it a competition.

Perhaps to save money, they could piggy-back on a main rover mission, using a common hub for data relay purposes.

Let's face it, the educational value would go very far. Winners would get a chance to operate the MSL. Runnres up: Opportunity.  :)

I think we need to keep it to cheaper robots that have already been "retired".  Even if NASA collected all the data for the kids, it would still be exciting.

I am trying to think of data on the Earth we need to look at climate change.  We are already well covered with all of our weather collecting capabilities.  I am thinking we need might need more data on the oceans.  I am sure a lot of this can be done from orbit.  I wonder if a history of the oceans is available by some type of sampling on the ocean floor.

Danny Deger
Danny Deger

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17940
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 661
  • Likes Given: 7794
Re: Why we need to go back to the moon
« Reply #39 on: 10/20/2009 01:26 am »

Capital idea!

One mission, multiplexed solar powered rovers, with a little digging arm and a random assortment of sensors to give schools different & challenging tasks. Maybe even make it a competition.

Perhaps to save money, they could piggy-back on a main rover mission, using a common hub for data relay purposes.

Let's face it, the educational value would go very far. Winners would get a chance to operate the MSL. Runners up: Opportunity.  :)

I think we need to keep it to cheaper robots that have already been "retired".  Even if NASA collected all the data for the kids, it would still be exciting.


I am talking about cheaper robots, say 10-20 kg. You can also try having portions without completely rad-hard electronics, that way the kids learn about the effects of radiation on the moon.

Granted most ISRU methods would make use of sub-surface resources, but if you did that with a 'main rover', but have a few smaller 'satellite' rovers performing surface data gathering. You could also have them ferry samples to a stationary lander for lab analysis. Everyone would be a part of it.

To cap it off, have a game on the lunar surface pushing a ball around. :)

Seriously, the kids are a real key for many of the reasons for going into space, for they are inevitably the ones that benefit from the results, for by the time the spacecraft is funded, built, and launched, sometimes a decade can pass. If you had grade school kids place a keepsake on a rover, and then some 10 years later have the chance to operate that rover, that can create a very strong bond for the child becoming an adult, and perhaps a path into higher learning.

We need kind of enthusiasm, perhaps even fear, brought on by the launch of Sputnik, and it's effect on America and the education system. That one moment of time was stunning; it's effects, some would have thought ever-lasting, were lost through the decades. It needs to be found again, though hopefully not in the shadow of a cold war.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0