NASA - An $80 Million Hole In The Moon
Me feels it is time SOMEONE walks up to NASA administrators and asks a realitve question:
"Nasa - do you guys have too much time and way too much money on your hands?"
NASA to Crash Space Probe Into Moon:
The entire mission will cost more than $600 million with the impactor project cost-capped at $80 million.
EIGHTY-MILLION DOLLAR HOLE IN THE MOON?
I just happen to be inside Nasa's HQ. I'm going to sneak up on some of Nasa's leading scientists as they talk about the President's moon program over lunch in the cafeteria. Ah yes, I see Joe, Frank, Tommy and Ishra and look, there's an open table next to them where I can sit down and listen in... (I'll notate since you can't see who's talking)
Nasa did indeed have a Ranger program. Rangers 1 through 5 were utter failures. Ranger 6 was a failure too - an 800 pound, $25 Million failure. And remember - that is late 1960's money!
If each of the Ranger craft cost $25 million EACH, Nasa has already tossed nearly a quarter of a BILLION dollars into "crash testing" the moon. Whew!
Rangers 7, 8 and 9 were successfully flown/crashed into the moon. Ranger 9 switched on its cameras at 5 minutes / 400 miles from impact. So, Ranger 9 was "haulin the mail", moving along at roughly 80 miles a minute or approximately 2.5 miles in less than 2 seconds!
I wonder what kind of crater an 800 pound spacecraft traveling at 80 miles a minute (4800 miles per hour) would make in the surface of the moon? I'd think a pretty good-sized one, wouldn't you?
So we know Nasa has done this before, right? Right. Nine attempts with (it would seem) only three success stories. Nasa even produced a somewhat related movie titled, "Assignment: Shoot the moon". I am NOT kidding - lookitup.
And you know the good thing about the announcement?
Today, back in 1967, Ranger 9 went ballastic on the moon. Today, 39 years ago, an 800 pound spacecraft impacted the moon at 80 miles a minute (4800 miles an hour).
The (new) entire mission (man on the moon 2018) will cost more than $600 million with the impactor project cost-capped at $80 million.
AN EIGHTY-MILLION DOLLAR HOLE IN THE MOON? Well, adjusted for inflation I suppose it is a bargain at only 2.5 times the original program cost.
You read the blurb and you'll see they want to look for water, etc, etc... HEY GUYS - 'Scuse me,
but didn't you actually have MEN on the Moon back in the 1970's? HELLO? And you're going to tell me - all you PhD folks didn't have enough sense to send along a dowsing rod with the astronauts?
Say - why didn't anyone think of asking the question "is there water on the moon" during the Apollo moon missions? It would have been an easy task to have taken along a small well-drilling rig to do some deep core samples.
Come ON Nasa - you guys really DO have too much money and time on your hands - Sheesh!
Technorati tags: Nasa Has Money To Burn
I just happen to be inside Nasa's HQ. I'm going to sneak up on some of Nasa's leading scientists as they talk about the President's moon program over lunch in the cafeteria. Ah yes, I see Joe, Frank, Tommy and Ishra and look, there's an open table next to them where I can sit down and listen in... (I'll notate since you can't see who's talking)
Joe: "Ishra, you're not understanding the full principle at work here. I'm right, aren't I Frank?"BACK TO REALITY IN 2006
Frank: "Yea Joe - as much as one can be right and still be correct."
Tinny laughter.
Ishra: "But what I am telling you sir, is I do understand. We've been given a mission, we're
planning, we will be spending, we're on schedule and there are no major problems. After all..."
A pregnant pause...
Ishra: "Nasa's been there many times already."
Hilarious bouts of laughter by everyone but Ishra, who has a very puzzled look.
Tommy: "Ishra, you just slay me. Of course..."
More laughter.
Tommy: "Of course we've been to the moon, many times. Its just we need something big, huge, flashy - you know, I'm talking big, huge here - nuclear - otherwise..."
Joe: "Otherwise Ishra, everyone forgets about it and the money goes away come the next election."
Frank: "Going away means bye-bye job, no US base on the moon in uh, 2018 and no more H1 for you Ishra."
Tommy: "Big, huh? Say, do you guys remember the Ranger program?"
Everyone appears deep in thought except Ishra.
Ishra: "Ah yes - the Ranger program, when the USA was so wealthy it could build spacecraft after spacecraft only to crash them into the moon - correct?"
Tommy: "Yes indeed... only back then, the cameras, the image quality was well, crappy. Just think of the show we could put on today... why..."
Joe: "Oh hell yes - my God Tommy! You could probably watch the impact with a regular home video camera - boy, oh boy, oh boy!"
Ishra: "And cost would be minimal, a very small slice of the program. Hmm."
Frank: "Yeah, great idea guys - everyone loves to watch a crash - but you're forgetting something really important here."
Glances exchanged.
Joe: "What - what are we forgetting?"
Frank: "Conservationists - tree, er, moon huggers. You realize of course there are millions who still worship the moon as a godess, right? Add to them the world's conservationists and I think you'd be in for one helluva fight."
Ishra: "True, very true... conservationists didn't have the political power way back then that they have now..."
Tommy: "So? So what? We're Nasa guys - c'mon, we can devise a purpose for this, aside from the advertising side of it. Now think..."
Everyone looks deep in thought. I'm amazed at what I'm hearing so far - did we really slam spacecraft into the moon back in the 1960's - on purpose? I don't remember them teaching us that in school! I'll look it up when these guys finish.
Joe: "Well... I've an idea... but don't laugh... at least, not too much..."
Tommy: "Spit it out Joe, sheesh!"
Frank: "Yeah, we're dying here... right Ishra?"
Ishra: "Yes, I'm telling you, we are dying right here."
Chuckles around.
Joe: "Well, the goal of the program is to establish a milit.. I mean a moon base by what, 2018, right?"
Everyone nods at the obvious.
Joe: "They'll need a source of water you see... and well... if we hit the moon just right, why we can fly a second craft right through the ejecta, then analyze, spectralize, disectisize, purify and shoot a few laser beams at it to determine if there is water on the moon."
Laughter breaks out like a spring flood.
Ishra: "But sir, we already know the answer to that question... Ahh..."
Joe: "We do but they.."
Joe points towards a window, out towards the civilian world which exists beyond Nasa.
Joe: "... but they don't know we know - see?"
More laughter.
Frank: "It's been done before, multiple times. So we know it works. We also know it drew a reasonably large audience, so we know it will draw an even larger audience these days. And we're not talking some measly little crater, oh no. This one has to be huge - let's say, oh, about 1/3rd the size of a modern US NFL football stadium.
Tommy: Think of the tie-ins and tie-backs. Meteor crater in Arizona. A man-made crater on the Moon, visible from Earth. What could happen to the Earth if a huge object impacted the earth in slo-mo. NO ONE could say we didn't go to the moon; no faking an impact this huge. Oh man this is great..."
Tommy passes a bit of gas to the disgust of his lunch buddies.
Tommy: "Damn burritos and spicy bean salads!"
Ishra: "Holey Moon, Gasman!"
Chuckles - Ishra's comic timing is a bit slow and pedestrian for the others.
Ishra: "On that note gentlemen, I will start immediately on Project Douser aka Moonhole."
Nasa did indeed have a Ranger program. Rangers 1 through 5 were utter failures. Ranger 6 was a failure too - an 800 pound, $25 Million failure. And remember - that is late 1960's money!
If each of the Ranger craft cost $25 million EACH, Nasa has already tossed nearly a quarter of a BILLION dollars into "crash testing" the moon. Whew!
Rangers 7, 8 and 9 were successfully flown/crashed into the moon. Ranger 9 switched on its cameras at 5 minutes / 400 miles from impact. So, Ranger 9 was "haulin the mail", moving along at roughly 80 miles a minute or approximately 2.5 miles in less than 2 seconds!
I wonder what kind of crater an 800 pound spacecraft traveling at 80 miles a minute (4800 miles per hour) would make in the surface of the moon? I'd think a pretty good-sized one, wouldn't you?
So we know Nasa has done this before, right? Right. Nine attempts with (it would seem) only three success stories. Nasa even produced a somewhat related movie titled, "Assignment: Shoot the moon". I am NOT kidding - lookitup.
And you know the good thing about the announcement?
Today, back in 1967, Ranger 9 went ballastic on the moon. Today, 39 years ago, an 800 pound spacecraft impacted the moon at 80 miles a minute (4800 miles an hour).
The (new) entire mission (man on the moon 2018) will cost more than $600 million with the impactor project cost-capped at $80 million.
AN EIGHTY-MILLION DOLLAR HOLE IN THE MOON? Well, adjusted for inflation I suppose it is a bargain at only 2.5 times the original program cost.
You read the blurb and you'll see they want to look for water, etc, etc... HEY GUYS - 'Scuse me,
but didn't you actually have MEN on the Moon back in the 1970's? HELLO? And you're going to tell me - all you PhD folks didn't have enough sense to send along a dowsing rod with the astronauts?
Say - why didn't anyone think of asking the question "is there water on the moon" during the Apollo moon missions? It would have been an easy task to have taken along a small well-drilling rig to do some deep core samples.
Come ON Nasa - you guys really DO have too much money and time on your hands - Sheesh!
Technorati tags: Nasa Has Money To Burn
posted by Creative Thought @ 11:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home