Nasa to put man on far side of moon

Times of London ^ | 3/18/06

[iPod Shuffle]

The Sunday Times March 19, 2006

Nasa to put man on far side of moon Jonathan Leake , Science Editor NASA, the American space agency, has unveiled plans for one of the largest rockets ever built to take a manned mission to the far side of the moon.

It will ferry a mother ship and lunar lander into Earth orbit to link up with a smaller rocket carrying the crew. Once united they will head for the moon where the larger ship will remain in orbit after launching the lunar lander and crew.

The design emerged during a space science conference in Houston, Texas, last week. The plan is part of Nasa’s “Return to the Moon” programme set in motion by President George W Bush two years ago.

Under the project, up to four astronauts at a time will land on the far side of the moon to collect rock samples and carry out research, including looking for water that might one day support a lunar base.

The scale of the missions is much larger than the earlier Apollo programme, which is why Nasa will need two separate rockets to take the mother ship and crew into space.

Some missions will also see manned spacecraft landing in unexplored areas such as the lunar mountains and on the moon’s south and north poles.

John Connolly, manager of Nasa’s lunar lander project, said the system was designed to carry crews to almost every part of the moon’s surface.

“The samples they collect and the research they carry out will help solve many mysteries about the origins and composition of the moon and its suitability as a base,” he said.

The Apollo programme carried out six lunar landings between 1969 and 1972. The feat was a triumph, but the technical limitations of the Apollo craft, plus ignorance of lunar terrain, meant all six missions had to be sent to the moon’s plains.

These regions, all on the near side of the moon, were the only areas known to be flat enough for a safe landing. This has frustrated scientists because the samples collected by the six missions are all similar. They are also thought to be younger than lunar mountain rocks.

The far side — so called because it always faces away from the Earth — was first photographed in 1959 by a Russian probe. In 1968 the astronauts of Apollo 8 became the first to view it directly.

The evidence gathered by such missions was enough to deter any attempt to land because most of the far side appeared to be covered in large craters. Additionally, any craft landing there would be cut off from radio contact with Earth.

Connolly believes, however, that Nasa will be able to overcome such problems by sending a series of robotic probes ahead of the manned missions.

The first of these, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, to be launched in 2008, will map the moon’s surface in detail.

Cameras will photograph the surface, backed by a laser altimeter to create a three-dimensional relief map from which Nasa can identify landing sites.

Then, from 2010, a series of “companion lander” missions will carry out test landings on selected sites to see if they are worth a visit by humans.

The final element will be a system of communications satellites, dubbed the “lunar internet”, so astronauts will be able to relay signals to Earth from any part of the moon.

Connolly said the first humans could arrive as early as 2015, although 2018 was more likely. The agency would then aim to send two crews to the moon each year for up to five years. The programme will cost around £56 billion and may also be used to test technology for any future mission to Mars.

Some have questioned whether the programme will produce enough good science to justify the costs.

Manuel Grande, head of the planetary science group at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxfordshire, dismissed such fears. “Finding out more about the moon will help us understand where the Earth and moon came from,” he said. “There do not have to be good scientific reasons . . . It’s like going up Everest; we want to go to places like the moon and Mars just because they are there.”

[elcid1970]

About twenty years ago, a Saudi astronaut went on a U.S. shuttle mission. Imams recommended that in orbit he face towards the Earth for prayers while simulating ritual handwashing. Ironically, there were several French astronauts on the same mission. They made the Saudi look likeable by comparison.

[DoughtyOne]

You and me both...

Believe me when I say that I was really bumed when my displeasure with NASA finally boiled over around 1990 and I simply couldn't defend them as I had for the prior thirty years.

Every fiber of my body desires the conquest of space.

[NCC-1701]

That Saudi astronaut had some rathe unkind things to say about America after 9-11. I can't find the link but in a real Reader Digest version it went something like "thanks for the ride, death to America".

[thoughtomator]

Wonder what all these people are whispering about?

[Freedom4US]

True, but about 40 per cent of the moon's surface is never visible from Earth. I tried to explain this to an otherwise intelligent individual, to no avail. That's why the Soviet photos were so startling - the "dark side" is much different, far more craters and so on. Hm.

[cardinal4]

Fair enough, but you released a firestorm of ill-informed comments.

Have you confused me someone else? These are my only two posts on this thread:The Dark Side of the Moon, eh? Anyone told Gilmour et al, yet? and Dang, I thought I would've the first reference Floyd! GMTA!

Am I wrong? Was David Gilmour NOT in Pink Floyd for their 1973 release, Dark Side of the Moon? Im fairly certain he was, as Im listening to "Time" right now..!

[elcid1970]

You know, you try to at least like some people, even Muslims, then they come up with this s#&t.

Disappointed I am, but thanks for letting me know.

Worthless b@st@rds!

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

You were the first to mention the "dark side of the moon" and then several posters seemed to be deriding NASA for considering landing in the darkness. < sigh> Not your fault, maybe but ...

[billbears]

Nasa to put man on far side of moon Jonathan Leake , Science Editor NASA, the American space agency, has unveiled plans for one of the largest rockets ever built to take a manned mission to the far side of the moon.

Yep because we need to maintain national security on the other side of the moon. To prevent attacks from Jupiter, Saturn, and definitely Mars. Those Martians are probably getting upset at us sending probes to their planet.

Sheesh, has the national government truly run out of ways to waste money that they're going to do this?!?

Manuel Grande, head of the planetary science group at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxfordshire, dismissed such fears. “Finding out more about the moon will help us understand where the Earth and moon came from,” he said. “There do not have to be good scientific reasons . . . It’s like going up Everest; we want to go to places like the moon and Mars just because they are there.”

Hey Manuel, last time I checked, governments don't pay for trips to Everest. You want to do it, waste your own money. I'd soon just as see my taxes lowered than pay for a joyride for someone with nothing better to do

[cardinal4]

You really need to "lighten up"....

Get it? "Lighten up"? "Dark" Side..? I kill me...:)

[manwiththehands]

I didn't know that. That's intriguing.

More craters on the far side of the moon would make sense. Meteoroids pulled towards earth's gravity would have to fly by the moon's orbit. If the same side of the moon faced away from the earth and towards space it would get more impacts. Cool.

[gotribe]

I tried to explain this to an otherwise intelligent individual, to no avail.

Hmm...maybe just tell them that it spins that way so it can keep its best side toward us.

[dr_who_2]

Putting Americans back on the far side of the moon is important for BILLIONS and BILLIONS of symbolic and hopelessly impractical reasons. The TOTALITY of human experience can be summed up by the act of DISCOVERY. The EXERCISE of our IMAGINATION is important for the FUTURE of our SPECIES in the COSMOS. To think that only two DECADES from now, our CHILDREN could be hydroponically growing POT on human settlements on the moon while our national DEBT could be growing close to the size of a GOOGLE PLEX....

[ordinaryguy]

If the same side of the moon faced away from the earth and towards space it would get more impacts. Cool.

Not for the Mooninites who live on that side!

[Names Ash Housewares]

"....settlements on the moon while our national DEBT could be growing close to the size of a GOOGLE PLEX...."

And NASA is not the problem. See the graph below where our money goes. Entitlements is the problem.

By the way. Sagan never said "billions and billions". Johnny Carson did, impersonating him and it stuck.

[Incorrigible]

Sheesh! Post #2!

The only reason I clicked on this thread was to add a Pink Floyd reference in case nobody else did.

[KarlInOhio]

Really? I always thought it was dark all the time on one side. You learn something everyday at FR

Yes. The moon is tidally locked to earth, so the same face always points approximately at earth. It appears to rock a little back and forth because the moon's orbit isn't circular, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration for a great graphic illustrating this.

When the moon is full, the earthside is lit and the farside is dark. When the moon is new, the earthside is dark and the farside is lit.

[kanawa]

The "Far-side", may be a good place for OBL, and other errant Muslims....

I'm really wishing we would send up a gigantic spray can to the Moon
and paint ISLAM SUCKS in hugh letters big enough to be seen from Earth.

[Incorrigible]

That's a very helpful website!

http://www.FederalBudget.com

[NCC-1701]

Well, how about LooterGuy? He seems to show up everywhere these days.