OT - Man to land on the moon

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
60,511
31,738
113
Unfortunately, the history of NASA's missions and funding over the last 40 years is that the goals completely change every time a new president is elected, and of course everything costs more and takes longer than budgeted. I'm hopeful we'll land a crew on the moon in 2024, but I'm not holding my breath.
 

EngDawg

Redshirt
Mar 29, 2016
2,037
4
38
Unfortunately, the history of NASA's missions and funding over the last 40 years is that the goals completely change every time a new president is elected, and of course everything costs more and takes longer than budgeted. I'm hopeful we'll land a crew on the moon in 2024, but I'm not holding my breath.

Yeah, I’d put money on 2024 not happening. At this rate, we may not see Artemis 2 fly by then. But hopefully the project doesn’t get abandoned or put on zombie status and we make it back within the next few years any way.
 

Bill Shankly

Redshirt
Nov 27, 2020
2,095
0
0
America has always been about the frontier. We have suffered since we no longer had one. We NEED this in the worst way.
 

RocketDawg

All-Conference
Oct 21, 2011
20,061
2,813
113
Unfortunately, the history of NASA's missions and funding over the last 40 years is that the goals completely change every time a new president is elected, and of course everything costs more and takes longer than budgeted. I'm hopeful we'll land a crew on the moon in 2024, but I'm not holding my breath.

NASA as a whole might be OK. Harris is from Southern California, where aerospace is huge. Generally, the NASA budget is so far down in the noise level that it might not even matter to them. We've survived party changes before and probalby will this time too.

It's pretty amazing that it's taking so long to actually build and fly the SLS though. I've been retired for 11 years, and we were working on it then and had been for a while. Saturn V was conceived and built in, I think, about 4 years. Of course, money was not much of a consideration then, but we also didn't have the technology that we do now. It should be simpler now, in theory.
 

WrapItDog

Senior
Aug 23, 2012
4,336
791
113
Since we're on the moon subject

The Allstate Moon commercial makes no sense. When the moon rover thing jumps the side of the crater with no gravity it would keep going off into space instead of landing smoothy at the bottom of the crater
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
60,511
31,738
113
I’ll be surprised if Mars happens in the next 100 years. People are vastly underestimating the difficulties.
 

Bill Shankly

Redshirt
Nov 27, 2020
2,095
0
0
Ain’t happening unless Elon does it. And he’s more interested in Mars.
Elon is more likely to go to prison for fraud than he is to go to Mars. I think that's why he is so gung ho to get to Mars, it's his only hope of escaping Leavenworth. No extradition treaties with Mars!
 

PineGroveBully

Redshirt
Nov 13, 2007
8,508
2
0
I wouldn’t have wanted to have been an ole country boy that hadn’t watched the news and was sitting in a deer stand anywhere near the SSC in Hancock county say around 4:20isb this afternoon.
 
Last edited:

CagerMania

Redshirt
Feb 27, 2008
335
3
13
I was laughing at that commercial the other day

Since we're on the moon subject

The Allstate Moon commercial makes no sense. When the moon rover thing jumps the side of the crater with no gravity it would keep going off into space instead of landing smoothy at the bottom of the crater

When they jump, there’s a disclaimer at the bottom that says “do not attempt” because of course there’s a lawyer who told them if we ever make it back to the moon and some astronaut decides to go Evel Kneivel, they could sue Allstate if not for this disclaimer.
 

SwampDawg

Sophomore
Feb 24, 2008
2,193
122
63
Here we are, thirty trillion dollars in debt, about to adopt several million people to clothe, medicate, house, educate, etc., and we are going to the frickin moon? Will we raise taxes to do this or just borrow it?
 

Ralph Cramden

Redshirt
Jan 7, 2020
2,696
0
0
Whether we tax to get or we just print more money it comes out of the working class tax payers pocket. The more they print the less the dollar is worth.
 

EngDawg

Redshirt
Mar 29, 2016
2,037
4
38
Here we are, thirty trillion dollars in debt, about to adopt several million people to clothe, medicate, house, educate, etc., and we are going to the frickin moon? Will we raise taxes to do this or just borrow it?

Bruh, it’s not that expensive in the grand scheme of things. You’re much better off complaining about welfare spending or the F-35 program depending on your political affiliation.
 

RocketDawg

All-Conference
Oct 21, 2011
20,061
2,813
113
He's certainly an odd duck. Appears to have a lot of good people working for him though.
 

RocketDawg

All-Conference
Oct 21, 2011
20,061
2,813
113
The space budget isn't even a speck on the window - it's totally untoticeable in the grand scheme of things. And it's directly responsible for a lot of the things you use on a daily basis and take for granted.
 

PineGroveBully

Redshirt
Nov 13, 2007
8,508
2
0
And man reaps all kinds of benefits and technology that might never spawn itself without pushing the boundaries of our space capabilities.
 
Nov 12, 2007
26,033
10,198
113
The space budget isn't even a speck on the window - it's totally untoticeable in the grand scheme of things. And it's directly responsible for a lot of the things you use on a daily basis and take for granted.


You would get more empathy with NASA if you talked about the lack of pronouns in NASA. The young folks today ain't worried 'bout that space **** if it ain't on Xbox or Play Station
 
Nov 12, 2007
26,033
10,198
113
Whether we tax to get or we just print more money it comes out of the working class tax payers pocket. The more they print the less the dollar is worth.

Is that the reason why gas went from $1.49 to $2.09 since the election?

Are we back to Barry's New/Old Normal?
 

was21

Senior
May 29, 2007
10,002
635
113
NASA budget roughly one half percent or 0.50% if the budget compared to about 1% for foreign aid...so neither amount to much contrary to popular myth, particularly foreign aid myth.
 

tribaldawg

Sophomore
Sep 1, 2012
502
173
43
When Tom Hanks, Bill Paxton, and Kevin Bacon missed the moon I was over trying to go back.
 

karlchilders.sixpack

All-Conference
Jun 5, 2008
21,102
4,880
113
What the hell did ya'll expect

with all of this Free $ going out.

Socialism in progress.

Just wait till they pump out that $15.00 min. wage stuff.
 
Last edited:

BossDawg78

All-Conference
Jan 25, 2015
3,991
1,257
113
Fat fingered a downvote. But THIS ^^^

Y'all can forget about the moon. This country is about to be turned into a 3rd world cesspool.
 

QuaoarsKing

All-Conference
Mar 11, 2008
6,292
3,050
113
Fat fingered a downvote. But THIS ^^^

Y'all can forget about the moon. This country is about to be turned into a 3rd world cesspool.
Your side has been insisting this for decades. Why should we suddenly believe you?
 

mstateglfr

All-American
Feb 24, 2008
16,886
6,695
113
Fat fingered a downvote. But THIS ^^^

Y'all can forget about the moon. This country is about to be turned into a 3rd world cesspool.
I can list things that I view as good and bad during Reagan, Bush, Clinton, W, Obama. Heck, I can even list some things I view as good during Trump(listing bad is a given).

I dont understand why we will suddenly turn i to a cesspool now. Furthermore, I would think turning into a cesspool would be a slow process for a country with the largest economy and third largest population in the world. If we are about to turn into a 3rd world cesspool, then its been tracking that way for the last few years...
 

Go Budaw

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
7,321
0
36
When they jump, there’s a disclaimer at the bottom that says “do not attempt” because of course there’s a lawyer who told them if we ever make it back to the moon and some astronaut decides to go Evel Kneivel, they could sue Allstate if not for this disclaimer.

I got a pretty good laugh out of that. The good news is that your liability coverage premium would be pretty much zero....not a great chance of getting in a fender bender with another driver on the surface of the moon.
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
60,511
31,738
113
Uncrewed mission in 2024. He might have an outside shot of that. I don't know. But it's going to be several orders of magnitude more difficult to send humans there, land them, and bring them back home.
 

RocketDawg

All-Conference
Oct 21, 2011
20,061
2,813
113
Right now, I just want Perserverance to land safely and start taking data. Scheduled for Feb 18.
 

EngDawg

Redshirt
Mar 29, 2016
2,037
4
38
I will say that the failed SLS green run test yesterday doesn’t bode well, but then again, my personal preference is to cancel SLS and modify existing launch vehicles to support a lunar mission.

I think the biggest challenge to this method would be that a Delta IV upper-stage would likely have to be refueled on orbit. That’s never been attempted before. (Hell it may not be possible, what do I know...). Refueling on orbit is absolutely essential to get to Mars though so this would be an important step in that direction.

For those curious, here’s how I see this playing out:

Delta IV heavy can launch Orion into LEO. Another Delta IV heavy would launch a tanker to refuel the first Delta’s upper-stage.

Delta IV heavy is not manned rated, so the crew launches aboard a SpaceX F9 Crew Dragon and rendezvous with Orion.

Select Blue Origin’s HLS proposal and launch it on Vulcan Centaur.

So here’s your launch cost totals. Keep in mind, HLS will be used across multiple missions.

Without SLS
Orion:
2 Delta IV heavy launches: $700 mil
1 Crewed F9 launch: $220 mil

HLS:
3 Vulcan Centaur launches : $600 mil


Total: $1.52 Billion

With SLS:
Orion:
1 SLS launch: $2 Billion

HLS
1 SLS launch: $2 Billion

Total: $4 Billion


The math just doesn’t make sense for SLS to continue to exist.
 
Last edited:

QuaoarsKing

All-Conference
Mar 11, 2008
6,292
3,050
113
Uncrewed mission in 2024. He might have an outside shot of that. I don't know. But it's going to be several orders of magnitude more difficult to send humans there, land them, and bring them back home.

By far the hardest part is bringing them back home, which is why I agree with the people who say the first mission should be permanent, with the astronauts having the understanding that they're long-term colonists, maybe permanently, or at least for decades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_to_Stay
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
60,511
31,738
113
Even just landing humans on Mars is going to be a huge challenge. Nobody right now really knows how the heck it can be done. You've got no atmosphere to speak of to slow the descent. If you bring enough fuel to slow it with brute force, you're going to drive up the weight and mission cost exponentially. And the bouncy balls and cranes they've used for the light rovers aren't feasible with a much heavier lander with humans inside.
 
Maroon and White

Latest

  1. 01 Maroon and White Football Anthony Evans III posts highest PFN WR grade of Week 5
  2. 02 Maroon and White Football Standout Stats: No. 7 Alabama 56-23 No. 16 Mississippi State
  3. 03 Maroon and White Football Unpacking Mississippi State's offensive unraveling against Alabama
  4. 04 Maroon and White Football "Learning Moments": Mississippi State HC Jeff Lebby speaks on rough outing for QB Kamario Taylor
  5. 05 Maroon and White Football "We let ourselves down": Isaac Smith and Anthony Evans III speak on Mississippi State's defeat to Alabama