Mars Mission a Trojan Horse?

Wired News ^ | 02:00 AM Jan. 16, 2004 PT | Suneel Ratan

[vannrox]

President Bush's plan to go to the moon and to Mars without much additional funding will force NASA and Congress to make hard choices -- particularly regarding the space shuttle and the hugely expensive International Space Station, observers said.

The Bush plan increases NASA's budget by just $1 billion over the next five years. That means the space agency has to figure out how to carry out the mission -- first a return to the moon and later a trip to Mars -- without a lot of additional money in its budget.

[taxcontrol]

He3 is almost none existant on earth. What does exist is a result of weapons programs. There is TONs on the moon, also apparently lots of titanium as well.

As for the fusion, well we know it is possible and have created micro fusion reactors so it is not a case of developing new science. It is more a scale issue.

Here is a more informative article - http://www.asi.org/adb/02/09/he3-intro.html

[DannyTN]

"Sounds like my kids: "Shouldn't I have a car before I get a job?"

Well......unless you want to play cabbie or can arrange a job where they don't need a car....I've got to side with the kids on this. Of course the downside of doing so is I've got two of my own that will be there some day.

[DannyTN]

Great Info... thanks.

[unibrowshift9b20]

taxcontrol says: "Offer $1 Billion for the first ton of He3 returned from the moon."

It would take a lot more than a billion dollars for them to afford it and a whole lot more for the risk to be viable. Maybe several hundred billion for a private company to make it and a trillion for it to be worth the risk. I don't think there's any company that can afford anywhere near those kinds of numbers for one single program. You'd need lots of companies, and even then that wouldn't be enough to do it. What you need is a company that is not based on profit, but simply on doing the things that need to be done. Thats not a company, and its not a charity. Actually, the answer is that its the government. The purpose of the government is to do the things that private businesses and people need but cannot afford to do on their own. Examples of proper government stuff include: legal and justice systems, infrastructure (you couldn't have several companies competing to get you to pay to drive on their roads), and the military. Another example is NASA. The US needs access to space militarily and civilly, but no company can do that. Its too risky. Not even Rutan. If there was profit on the moon, then companies would be there. If there was profit in having a military then companies would have them.

[tlrugit]

The real objective is to establish a military/communications/spy base on the moon. Satellites are much too vulnerable now that dozens of nations have space programs.

Our military would be blind and deaf if our military satellites were destroyed.

The Mars part is just a cover for spending far more money than a nonmilitary base on the moon would justify, especially the R&D.

All of which seems to me to be the short term benefit. Long term it seems to me that the US should lead in the exploitation of the solar system's resources. To do this at least one earth orbital processing plant and transfer point will be needed. The ISS is the test bed for that platform, and as such is needed.

[unibrowshift9b20]

"To do this at least one earth orbital processing plant and transfer point will be needed. The ISS is the test bed for that platform, and as such is needed."

Agreed. Maybe 40 years from now, we'll look back and see the NASA of the last 40 years as regrouping and developing what we need in LEO for the next big push.

[unibrowshift9b20]

wait, uh, 1972, uh, 32 years. oops.

[RightWhale]

Right, Brazil will be heard from.

[adam_az]

"BTW, He3 is excellent fusion material and it emits very little radiation."

Cool, so you designed a fusion reactor?

[sport]

Don't tell sheila jackson lee but President Bush and Vice President are searching Mars for Oil.

[adam_az]

Don't tell sheila jackson lee but President Bush and Vice President are searching Mars for Oil.

Actually, even weirder. On 9/8/1999, Kenneth Lay gave $500 to Sheila Jackson Lee!

[Physicist]

He went so far as to indicate that the plan is a Trojan Horse for killing the shuttle and station

That's fair. The shuttle and station were Trojan horses for killing worthwhile space exploration.

[aquawrench]

I dont know, when I hear 'moon base', I think of Austin Powers third flick.

Whats with all the hidden language, why dont Bush just come out and say, "My fellow Americans, tonight we are adding a 51st state to our union, the moon. Tommorrow a 52nd, Mars."

Please stop the crap about mining for this or that. We see another country out there that wants to take a run at us in China, right? Its all about China then isnt it?

[hopespringseternal]

Maybe several hundred billion for a private company to make it and a trillion for it to be worth the risk.

Uh, no. Anything NASA can do, the private sector could do much cheaper. I forget the number for the entire Apollo program in today's dollars, but it is nowhere near that much. And now we know how to do it, then we didn't.

[hopespringseternal]

That little detail always seems to get left out, doesn't it?

[F16Fighter]

Of what realistic benefit is a 'Mars Mission'?? If anything, a lunar mission makes some sense.

'Mars' is yet one MORE liberal spending boodoggle that is sure to exceed the budget projected by at least 10,000 percent.

[JSteff]

"If there was profit on the moon, then companies would be there. If there was profit in having a military then companies would have them."

Companies are not allowed to have a "military" as they are generally restricted by the weapons laws which apply to civilians.

A government does it's part with the initial R & D and exploration... ie, Spain with CColumbus. It was not known at the time if it was feasible or profitable. When that was discovered private enterprise took over and expanded on the discoveries.

Imagine the size of the task to put a rail road across a continent in 1776. Impossible and daunting. When the government sent Lewis and Clark and others to map and explore that was a job of government.

By doing that they set the basics and then private enterprise took over. It will be the same with space. Once the path is discovered, the profit motive will take over. Commerce, not government, propels and sustains us. Only our country can pull it off.

[unibrowshift9b20]

JSteff says: "Companies are not allowed to have a "military" as they are generally restricted by the weapons laws which apply to civilians."

I know, I was just saying that businesses can't afford to provide for their defense individually, so they have a government.

JSteff: "A government does it's part with the initial R & D and exploration... ie, Spain with CColumbus. It was not known at the time if it was feasible or profitable. When that was discovered private enterprise took over and expanded on the discoveries.

Imagine the size of the task to put a rail road across a continent in 1776. Impossible and daunting. When the government sent Lewis and Clark and others to map and explore that was a job of government.

By doing that they set the basics and then private enterprise took over. It will be the same with space. Once the path is discovered, the profit motive will take over. Commerce, not government, propels and sustains us. Only our country can pull it off."

Yes, I agree with you about that. I think the general direction NASA will head in is as the forerunner in space exploration for everybody else. Currently that means NASA does everything but commercial satellites, and soon sub orbital stuff, but later that may mean they under take missions to the outer planets, while everybody else tools around the moon.

[unibrowshift9b20]

hopespringseternal wrote: "Uh, no. Anything NASA can do, the private sector could do much cheaper. I forget the number for the entire Apollo program in today's dollars, but it is nowhere near that much. And now we know how to do it, then we didn't."

Of course, government is an inefficient thing at best, but the point is that government exists to do the things that everyone else needs but can't provide on their own. Everybody needs an army to protect them, but we can't all afford tanks and helicopters alone, thats why we get together and create a government for the common defense. The same will apply to spacecraft until some breakthroughs come along.

Also, Apollo was like a scouting mission, whereas this is a fullscale outpost. You need a lot more stuff than you can fit into a LEM.

Also, all the information about Apollo is lost. We literally don't know how to do it anymore. The MER entry descent and landing team had to go back and ask the people who designed the heat shields for the capsules, because they discovered that they had no information on how to make a heat shield. NASA didn't document it, and the only way to get the info is to go back and ask the people who did it. These people are retired now, which is all the more reason for us to do this while we still have the first generation of NASAns' living memory. After that, we'll have no experiential advantage over anybody else in this new race.

[hopespringseternal]

The same will apply to spacecraft until some breakthroughs come along.

The only real breakthrough is managerial. Technically, there is no real reason why launches should cost what they do. It is a chicken or egg problem both ways, for government and the private sector. A moon base has potential for breaking the logjam, but if congress doesn't balk and cut things short it will be the first time.

Also, Apollo was like a scouting mission, whereas this is a fullscale outpost. You need a lot more stuff than you can fit into a LEM.

So far there are no firm plans for exactly what this outpost will be. It will of course have to be bigger than a LEM, but the minimum possible size isn't much bigger. The space station will probably look roomy and well populated next to a moon base.

Also, all the information about Apollo is lost. We literally don't know how to do it anymore.

Urban legend. Not that it matters that much. We figured it out in 8.5 years with a lot less technology than we have now. Besides, if you want a moon base worth anything, Apollo won't cut it anyway. The infrastructure is all technically possible, but the contractors really don't want to build it because congress will probably chicken on the whole deal and if they do too good a job they could kill their own business.