NYT/AP: NASA to Crash Space Probe Into Moon

[DeepModem Mom]

NASA to Crash Space Probe Into Moon
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: April 10, 2006

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- NASA plans to crash a space probe into the moon in 2009 -- a collision so violent it will be visible on Earth through a telescope, the space agency said Monday.

The moon crash, part of a larger mission that includes a lunar orbiter, is a quest for ice. Water is the key ingredient for supporting future human outposts on the moon, a goal of the Bush administration.

NASA scientists say the collision should excavate a hole about a third the size of a football field and hurl a plume of debris into space. After the crash of the space probe, the mothership that released it will fly through the plume and look for traces of water ice or vapor -- similar to NASA's Deep Impact mission last July, which blasted into a comet.

The moon collision and orbiter will be the first of several lunar robotic projects before astronauts are sent to the moon, targeted for 2018. The entire mission will cost more than $600 million with the impactor project cost-capped at $80 million.

The mission is set to launch in October 2008, with a rocket that carries both the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and impactor. The orbiter will circle the moon for at least a year, mapping the surface, searching for water and scouting for potential future landing sites to send astronauts. The orbiter will pay particular attention to the south pole, which NASA considers a prime candidate for a future outpost....

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Moon-Mission.html

[liberal N proud]

1. Watch them screw this up and alter the orbit of the moon.

I know it is a big rock, but, in outer space? one never knows.

[DavidDvorkin]

19. Nonsense. The mass of the spacecraft is insignificant

Compared to the mass of the moon.

Not to mention that space rocks crash into the moon all the time.

[The_Casual_Observer]

34. NASA has been pushing on this water on the moon thing for years

Once they try this and the results show there is no water, they won't give up, they will devise another experiment that will employ a bunch of people for another 20 years.

[Codeine]

31. One does know, actually.

Stuff much larger that this probe smacks into the moon all the time. The relative masses are comparable to a dust particle whacking into you.

[MUAD_DIB]

50. In the the 1300s Italian monks witnessed what they thought

was the end of the world. The horned moon went dark from tip to tip.

What they were actually witnessing was an asteriod impact.

In fact the moon still wobbles ever so slightly from this impact today so whatever we throw up at it will be insignificant in comparison.

[Rick Myers]

2. NASA says the Impactor is 'the size of an SUV"...

Maybe they can get Hummer to sponsor it! I think NASA should be like NASCAR!!!

[formercia]

10. Good use for a HUMMER

NASA launches simulated IED to surface of moon in an attempt to recreate what might happen if the insurgency migrates there. Pack it with old Sovbloc artillery shells daisy-chained together. Just like Iraq without an atmosphere to propagate the BANG!.

[Joanne98]

3. Do they have to bomb EVERYTHING!

[IndianaGreen]

14. It's a male thing!

They always have to bomb, shoot, destroy, or penetrate something to be happy.

What a simpleton gender!

[Gman]

24. LOL!

That's kinda just how we are! But it is fun!

And I've always thought being simpletons really is a blessing!

[MiniMe]

26. Why do you think rockets are shaped the way they are?

[Codeine]

30. Jeez.

If I made that comment with the gender switched I'd be tombstoned, and rightly so.

[Richard Steele]

4. Damn, I was hoping they meant the REVEREND Moon!

[TomInTib]

8. That's the funniest thing I've read all day n/t

[ClassWarrior]

5. Is that the space probe they're using to eavesdrop on us?

Ohhh... NASA... not... Awww, nevermind.

NGU.

[slackmaster]

6. Lunar real estate values will go down the tubes

:nuke:

The moon should be made into an international park and left alone.

[DoYouEverWonder]

7. Can't they just land something

and drill a deep hole?

They've got to be able to drill deeper then they can go by slamming something into it?

[Canuckistanian]

23. This is cheap

Easier to smash something into a body and measure the gases than to send down a complicated, mobile chemistry lab.

Quick and dirty results.

[leveymg]

9. I knew there was a reason we needed to go back. We forgot

somebody.

[whistle]

11. Everyone seems to be getting into the act....

<snip>

SMART-1 To Crash Into Lunar Surface In August
by Staff Writers

Esrange, Sweden (SPX) January 31, 2006
The European Moon probe SMART-1, which was developed by SSC for ESA, has been orbiting the Moon since November 2004. Its main mission, to qualify an electric propulsion system, is completed, and the probe is now making observations of the lunar surface using its onboard scientific instruments.
The first scientific results from SMART-1 will be published in connection with an ESA event in February.

The natural effects of gravity from the Sun and the Earth will cause SMART-1 to crash into the lunar surface in August this year. The touch-down will occur at a flat angle near latitude 37 degrees south. The crash, which will be observable by telescope from Earth, may stir up dust or create other effects, providing valuable information about the lunar surface.

Astronomers are invited to take part in observations of the crash
<snip>

China and India training with SMART-1

Apart from making observations of the lunar surface from a gradually lower orbit, SMART-1 will be used by Indian and Chinese ground stations for radio control training for their future moon orbiters.

<end snip>


<link> http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/SMART_1_To_Crash_Into_Lunar_Surface_In_August.html

<at same link>
Russia Plans Mine On The Moon By 2020
Moscow (AFP) Jan 25, 2006
Russia is planning to mine a rare fuel on the moon by 2020 with a permanent base and a heavy-cargo transport link, a Russian space official said Wednesday.

[951-Riverside]

12. Let me guess in 20XX George P. Bush will want to crash a nuke into it....

to fight the war on lunar terrorism :)

[newswolf56]

13. The arrogant god-is-on-our-side folly of these patriarchal morons...

literally takes my breath away. We're running out of petroleum -- which means not only our entire economy but our entire technology (and therefore our entire alleged civilization) is collapsing back to the 19th Century (if not clear back to the Stone Age) -- and these idiots are still masturbating to greedophallic fantasies about raping the cosmos via the conquest of space. By 2018 we won't even have enough fuel left to get a plane in the air, much less propel a rocket to escape velocity. And that is the optimistic scenario: one that totally ignores the environmental apocalypse of global warming and its associated wars, famines, epidemics and natural disasters -- not to mention estimates that the human population might be reduced by as much as 90 percent if not totally exterminated.

[MsKandice01]

15. Damnit, leave the moon alone!

Can we get the actual planet in decent shape first?

[Ikari Gendo]

17. Wake up, you luddites.

Back in the 60's the Dems lost a lot of respect because they were seen as anti-science, anti-technology, and anti-progress. This should not be the legacy of a party that claims to be progressive.

For those of you whining "How dare they send money into space when there's poverty here in America," I lived on the Rosebud Reservation in South Dakota. You could drop the entire NASA budget into that fiscal black hole and it wouldn't touch sides or bottom.

Science pays for itself if you let it, and for those of you who don't know what NASA has done for you, let me lead you to <http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html>.

If you don't like science, go join the Kansas School Board.

[depakid]

22. Get a grip

Despite what this stupid NY Times article implies- we're NOT going back to the moon.

We ARE NOT going to have "lunar outposts" (and not just because there's no reason for them).

In case you haven't been paying attention- the country is massively in debt, petroleum is peaking (and natural gas is in depletion in North America) not to mention we have his little problem with global climate change.

It's the Bush administration- NOT DUer's that have trashed NASA.

[DeepModem Mom]

27. Hi, Ikari Gendo -- thanks for posting, and welcome to DU!

[Crunchy Frog]

16. What alot of progress in only 4 decades.

From landing people on the moon and returning them safely to Earth, to smashing things into it and making a big "BOOM!":eyes:

[Endangered Specie]

18. This shouldn't be too hard for them...

though they may very well miss :eyes:

[DavidDvorkin]

20. The Luddite reactions in this thread are depressing

It doesn't matter if the creationists win the day in their battle. Clearly, science has lost far too much ground in America in general.

[MsKandice01]

25. Can you explain to me why we need human outposts on the moon?

I don't get it.

[Solon]

55. Answer in post 54. n/t

[arikara]

29. I don't see it so much Luddite, instead

its the frustration of seeing how they don't use science for the good of people or the environment. For example, clean alternative and cheap energy sources that don't pollute the Earth would perhaps be more worthwhile than whamming a phallic symbol into the moon for what particular reason?

[Solon]

54. You seem to lack perspective...

OK, the Moon has an energy source, an Isotope of Helium called Helium-3 that can be used for CLEAN fusion reaction, it is not found in great quantities on Earth. Unlike isotopes of Hydrogen, which have a tendancy for harmful radiation being emitted, along with radioactive materials being produced, the He3 wouldn't have that problem. Not to mention that the "grunt work" in extracting it from the regolith would be on the Moon's surface itself, not anywhere near Earth. Finding out whether their is water ice on the Moon will help, a LOT, first thing first, Water does two things, and two things well, first, its a good source for rocket fuel, how else to send He3 back to Earth, next, its good for life support systems and energy systems on any semi-permanent or permanent bases that would be established to extract the He3, so, to answer your question, this is for finding a cheap and reliable, clean and enviromentally friendly energy source to replace those on Earth.

[MGKrebs]

21. My only problem is that we have been there multiple times,

already dug some holes, brought samples back, and of course it is the closest celestial body so we have pretty good telescopic information too. I am just disappointed that we apparently don't know if there is water there.

[Poll_Blind]

28. Message to Moon: Don't you go messin' with God's America!

Stolen with glee from Mr. Show with Bob and David.

PB

[Canuck55]

33. First thing i thought of when i saw this thread...

...that sketch was beyond classic.

"The monkey knows sign language. He is asking why. The monkey wants to know why we're blowing up the moon."

Not to mention "Why are we spending all this money to blow up the moon, when there are so many things we should blow up right here on Earth first."

[William Seger]

32. They're pro'lly gonna bash up that pyramid city....

... like they did the face on Mars. :tinfoilhat:

[truthisfreedom]

35. actually, the plan is to break away the crusty exoskeleton and reveal the

giant shiny alien space probe beneath the surface.


really.


that's the plan.


giant. shiny. alien. space. probe. watching. Earth.

[BrightKnight]

36. Le Voyage dans la lune - 1902

They did that in this 1902 moon shot.

You can watch it here: http://www.archive.org/details/Levoyagedanslalune

[OKNancy]

37. kick

[Flabbergasted]

38. NASA wants to crash into moon (Finally.....A Moon Base?)

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2006-04-10-moon-crash_x.htm?POE=TECISVA

By John Kelly, Florida Today

NASA plans to smash a probe into the moon's south pole in a hunt for water. A lunar impactor will hitch a ride on the 2008 launch of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

A bevy of water would make the polar region ideal for a lunar base because it could be used to make drinking water, breathing air and rocket propellant. That would be a huge money-saver for human missions because it means that much less cargo to launch, at $10,000 a pound, off of the Earth.

[electropop]

39. Can we help Bush fulfill his dream of being a spaceman?

You know, tell him there's oil on the Moon?

[mike_c]

40. lots of brush to clear there too....

:rofl:

[Flabbergasted]

42. Laura does most of that.....George has to watch after his doggy

[saigon68]

44. His Poodle Doggy LapDog Blair

[Flabbergasted]

41. He'd send Mr Hali Burton!

[Cooley Hurd]

43. Does anyone remember the syndicated tv show 'Space 1999?'

They built a nuclear dump base on the moon, and it blew up and sent the moon careening thru space.

I'm just sayin' ;)

[electropop]

45. I remember that.

Mainly for Barbara Baine. Yummy.

Similar story in the recent remake of "The Time Machine." They're using nukes to do a little excavating for a Moon resort, and...oops! Next thing you know, the Moon is raining down on Earth.

[LoKnLoD]

46. Didn't

the aliens chase us away from there back in the 60's? I was reading this website that said a bunch of the astronauts saw alien bases there. :silly:

:tinfoilhat:

[stepnw1f]

47. George Shoots a Blank

Kennedy Lands a Man on the Moon... Bush shoots a blank... lollololololol!:rofl:

[Whoa_Nelly]

48. Have had dreams of watching the moon wobble...

Always wondered what would happen here if it did...

Although the probe won't make that happen, it's what this article brought to mind.

[moondust]

49. "Impactor" = "Bunker Buster".

Any bets?

[Codeine]

52. Nope

An explosive would contaminate the results.

[Odin2005]

51. The luddite reations are pathetic.

especially the patrarchal comment, whats that got to do with anything? :eyes:

[Codeine]

53. Some people are afraid of science. nt

[Chovexani]

56. Cool, they letting Lindsay Lohan pilot it?

Good to see her contributing to science. :P