why can there be no rover on the moon?

i just thought i would see what we could come up with as in reasons for why we shouldnt have rovers on the moon, im thinking testing for starters,,the first step to a colony, first unmanned then manned, less cost going to the moon then mars, i get the feeling like they just want to acomplish a mars base before a moon base and i dont understand that, theres lots to still learn about our moon unless nasa thinks its a worthless dust ball that keeps our tides in order

.
I think part of it is political, at least for the US. After putting a man on the moon, other investigations there seem kind of anti-climatic and hard to "sell" to the public.

I know this is a conspiracy board, and there are plenty of theories about what is on the moon. But consider the possibility that what scientist have been telling us is true: that the moon is just a big dead dusty ball of rock.

Now certainly that can still be of immense interest to scientists. But landing and taking off on the moon is expensive and technologically difficult--more so than orbital space flight. I think there is a real question of what can be gained there versus the cost. (This probably applies more to manned missions or an eventual base, rather than rovers)

It is interesting that in thinking about what our astronauts would do on the moon I realized how little I know about what we do on our space missions. It seems like most of the news is about the launch and the landing and very little is said about the missions, just generalities about experiments or repairs. Perhaps I'm just not tured in.

But it does raise the question of NASA's role in space.
How much of it is military?
How much of it is scientific?
What are our specific goals these days?
.

[edit on 10-10-2004 by cimmerius]

Nasa is planning on a robotic moon mission in 2008. As of yet thats all there say, so i'm not sure yet if it will have wheels.

and I think cimmerius hit the nail on the head, most people think "we've allready being there done that, so why spend billions just to do it again" But Nasa solved that problem by saying were going there as a stepping stone to get to Mars, which made more sense for the normal person who knows nothing about space.

Genesis
i get the feeling like they just want to acomplish a mars base before a moon base and i dont understand that, theres lots to still learn about our moon

There will be a moon base first, around 2015-2020. A Mars base will be at least a decade later.

Kind of off topic but... if we can see via the huble telescope, galaxies far far away, why can't we take some pictures of some of the old equipment on the moon. I think number one they would make awsome photos and two, end the debate on the "no moon landing" conspiracy.

Originally posted by AkulA
Kind of off topic but... if we can see via the huble telescope, galaxies far far away, why can't we take some pictures of some of the old equipment on the moon. I think number one they would make awsome photos and two, end the debate on the "no moon landing" conspiracy.

The hubble has already taken pictures of the moon but even on those you cant see anything as small as a lander platform. Heres a picture the hubble took of the moon you cant see anything close to that scale, the hubbles great and everything but not that great.

oposite.stsci.edu...

I don't think there really is anything amazingly exciting on the moon for average people. Scientist woud love to study and find out how it was formed as well as more complete of what the underground composition is. There are a couple reasons to go there...2nd base in case of catastrophe on earth. If the space elevator isn't feasible any time soon then the moon, with it's lower gravity, would allow for easier take-offs for spacecraft thereby reducing costs of fuel or carrying more cargo. Also...this is kinda far out but it's just more space. As Earth fills up the moon or mars might very well turn into a place to go to build your next office building. The moon is barren, you won't be hurting the environment or the atmosphere cause there's barely one. I especially see this happening if commercial spacecraft keep coming.


Edit: lol at the post below

[edit on 11-10-2004 by mr_sheldon]

I think they are afraid of retaliation.

Alien1: "OH NOES, THERE IS A... THING... ROLLING AT US AT AN ALARMING SPEED."
Alien2: "What thing?"
Alien1: "OVER THERE!!!"
Alien2: "The rock?"
Alien1: "PREPARE ALL DEFENSES AGAINST ALIEN INCURSION!"
Alien2: "It isnt moving you know."
Alien1: "Yes it is."
Alien2: "No it isn... Oh wait, it is. Maybe we should bomb it."
Alien1: "That's what I've been telling you!!! Soon the humans will come with their tanks and their planes and their jeeps and kill us!!!"
Alien2: "Its moved 10 centimeters."
Alien1: "ATTTTTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACK!!!!!!!!!!"

Originally posted by merka
I think they are afraid of retaliation.

Alien1: "OH NOES, THERE IS A... THING... ROLLING AT US AT AN ALARMING SPEED."
Alien2: "What thing?"
Alien1: "OVER THERE!!!"
Alien2: "The rock?"
Alien1: "PREPARE ALL DEFENSES AGAINST ALIEN INCURSION!"
Alien2: "It isnt moving you know."
Alien1: "Yes it is."
Alien2: "No it isn... Oh wait, it is. Maybe we should bomb it."
Alien1: "That's what I've been telling you!!! Soon the humans will come with their tanks and their planes and their jeeps and kill us!!!"
Alien2: "Its moved 10 centimeters."
Alien1: "ATTTTTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACK!!!!!!!!!!"

ummmmmm.....ooooooookkkaaaaaaaay. I have a feeling this is you.

LOL .... Merka how long were you sitting there working out what to say ... and the end product was that

Merka did you make that up or was it out of a movie? It sounds very monty pythonish

If you're curious as to why we can't see the Apollo debris on the moon....

curious.astro.cornell.edu...

Originally posted by Gazrok
If you're curious as to why we can't see the Apollo debris on the moon....

curious.astro.cornell.edu...

Thanks for the link.. It is pretty good reading.
Learned quite a bit.

Could we just send up a satellite to take a picure of the stuff and to map the whole of the moon at the same time? I mean, satellites above earth can take pics of very small objects. Just send one of those up there. I am sure there will be many uses for it.

Originally posted by Murcielago
Nasa is planning on a robotic moon mission in 2008. As of yet thats all there say, so i'm not sure yet if it will have wheels.

and I think cimmerius hit the nail on the head, most people think "we've allready being there done that, so why spend billions just to do it again" But Nasa solved that problem by saying were going there as a stepping stone to get to Mars, which made more sense for the normal person who knows nothing about space.

Genesis
i get the feeling like they just want to acomplish a mars base before a moon base and i dont understand that, theres lots to still learn about our moon

There will be a moon base first, around 2015-2020. A Mars base will be at least a decade later.

yea but been there done that isnt in our nature if we have somthing we can conquer or control,, i mean its like the moon being u.s. territory is an advantage,,not to mention preparing for a base for mars,, i just dont see why its taken 40 years with 0% headway on going back,,and i feel there is alot of public support but how they measure that support is another story

Originally posted by LordGoofus
Merka did you make that up or was it out of a movie? It sounds very monty pythonish

Out of a movie?

Taking time to figure it out?

BAAAH!!! People always underestimate me... But they wont as soon as my project is done...

I WILL SEND A LANDROVER TO THE MOON, AND THEN WE'LL SEE WHO LAUGHS!!!

BWAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

Now I only need to get it hooked up to an old SS-18 missile... It has a sweet seat warmer. Or at least I think it is one, its quite warm to the touch anyway.

[edit on 11-10-2004 by merka]

JCMinJapan says:

"Could we just send up a satellite to take a picure of the stuff and to map the whole of the moon at the same time? I mean, satellites above earth can take pics of very small objects. Just send one of those up there. I am sure there will be many uses for it.

Yoroshiku onegai shimasu.

There already was such a satellite launched and deployed in 1994; it was the Clementine Satellite. You can see the pictures at:

www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...

Here's a picture of the landing zone of Apollo 15:

www.space.com... lo%2015%20landing%20site.%20Click-to-Enlarge

Originally posted by Gazrok
If you're curious as to why we can't see the Apollo debris on the moon....

curious.astro.cornell.edu...

in notice in every debate where someone swears we went there they avoid the question of heat on the surface (to hot to film anything) or the no stars issue or the pictures taken and yes they are very funny with the sites on the one shot being behind an object and one more time why is buzz so mad at nasa and most astronauts are not pillars and hero's of society upon their return? why does everyone that says we went to the moon avoid questions like the film\heat, no stars, van allen belt, and photoshoped pics, even now on mars we are discovering nasa is photoshoping pics cutting and pasting skies and removing them

Pictures from space AREN'T film, they are digital, just raw streams of data then reassembled to form an image. They aren't "photoshopped", but simply put together to form a "true" interpretation of the data.

A trip to badastronomy.com should suffice...as you'll then see the counterpoints to such questions, and there is no need to retype it here...

Originally posted by genesiss

Originally posted by Gazrok
If you're curious as to why we can't see the Apollo debris on the moon....

curious.astro.cornell.edu...

in notice in every debate where someone swears we went there they avoid the question of heat on the surface (to hot to film anything) or the no stars issue or the pictures taken and yes they are very funny with the sites on the one shot being behind an object and one more time why is buzz so mad at nasa and most astronauts are not pillars and hero's of society upon their return? why does everyone that says we went to the moon avoid questions like the film\heat, no stars, van allen belt, and photoshoped pics, even now on mars we are discovering nasa is photoshoping pics cutting and pasting skies and removing them

Those cameras they had (in today terms) sucked, So thats why you dont see the stars there to tiny to even make a a single pixel, hence the reason it looks starless. I do believe Nasa is either photoshopping there Mars pics or there all colorblind. Now i'm not saying that martians are mowing there lawn and looking at a blue sly. I think there sky is different colors at different times, but when theres little to no dust in the air I think its white.

This pic I sent to Nasa like 6 months ago, asking them why they are changing the pictures color, but not suprisingly I got no response. Go figure
The Pic I sent to Nasa

well were is the billionaire
we need a prize challenge for reaching the moon

lets go privat entrepeneurs lets go to the moon with a rover
and later on with manned missionS

Originally posted by Murcielago

Originally posted by genesiss

Originally posted by Gazrok
If you're curious as to why we can't see the Apollo debris on the moon....

curious.astro.cornell.edu...

in notice in every debate where someone swears we went there they avoid the question of heat on the surface (to hot to film anything) or the no stars issue or the pictures taken and yes they are very funny with the sites on the one shot being behind an object and one more time why is buzz so mad at nasa and most astronauts are not pillars and hero's of society upon their return? why does everyone that says we went to the moon avoid questions like the film\heat, no stars, van allen belt, and photoshoped pics, even now on mars we are discovering nasa is photoshoping pics cutting and pasting skies and removing them

Those cameras they had (in today terms) sucked, So thats why you dont see the stars there to tiny to even make a a single pixel, hence the reason it looks starless. I do believe Nasa is either photoshopping there Mars pics or there all colorblind. Now i'm not saying that martians are mowing there lawn and looking at a blue sly. I think there sky is different colors at different times, but when theres little to no dust in the air I think its white.

This pic I sent to Nasa like 6 months ago, asking them why they are changing the pictures color, but not suprisingly I got no response. Go figure

The Pic I sent to Nasa

theyre probably smewhere on earth and not on mars at all....those snivelling little cowards....they probably only spend 1000 dollars a month on that peice of junk and hire some guy to drive the thing around the desert in circles