Comments on: Will NASA’s Next Step Be an Astronaut Rendezvous With an Asteroid?

By: My Reference Frame

My Reference Frame — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:41:47 +0000

That picture is of of Bruce McCandless in 1984 using the Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_McCandless_II.

By: scribbler

scribbler — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 19:08:16 +0000

Personally, I think it unwise to by pass all the resources the moon holds that would be VERY useful on any venture further out in space. What with the water, metals, minerals and protection from space a simple tunnel would provide, I think it prudent to first develop the moon as a staging area for further missions.

However, there is nothing that precludes putting a man on an asteroid at the same time…

As for building stations and fuel storage units and stuff, it would certainly be easier, in my opinion, to put them on the surface of bodies already in space.

By: Paganel

Paganel — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 14:46:49 +0000

- Buzz Aldrin comments on the “Monolith” on Mars Moon Phobos…
- APOLLO 11 UFO… VIDEO: “I Saw Structures on the Moon”:
http://cristiannegureanu.blogspot.com/2009/07/astronaut-buzz-aldrin-comments-on.html

By: QUASAR

QUASAR — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 15:33:44 +0000

I’ve always asked myself, who is that astronaut in that chair thing? Any ideas?

By: YouRang

YouRang — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 14:07:28 +0000

Still the #1 priority is a space station (unmanned most of the time) in an unbound orbit that acts like a ferry powered by ion propulsion. When the space station passes earth, an Apollo style shuttle ferries the astronauts to the large ferry which is already going fast enough to escape earth’s gravity. (Need to make sure the orbit is a free return orbit in case the Apollo capsule fails to dock with the space shuttle.) Then when it gets to its destination another Apollo capsule separates with a Lunar lander style shuttle; and the space station continues on in an unbound orbit with a return in a few weeks to pick up the Apollo capsule/lunar style lander.
Of course ultimately you would like to land on the moon to build a circumlunar maglev (actually maglev/mag-anti-lev) to accelerate and decelerate the space station with no loss of power. (needs to be primarily also anti-lev to hold the space station against centrifugal force).

By: Mithridates

Mithridates — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:13:25 +0000

Definitely in favour of the idea of going to a small asteroid before going somewhere like the Moon and Mars. Though we’ve only had a total of some 13 hours or so on the Moon’s surface people still act as if we’ve conquered the place, and perhaps going to a completely new destination first would be a good way to tune down the skepticism a bit. Not to mention the fact that going to an asteroid is actually much easier, since even though it would take a few months it wouldn’t require a separate rocket for the return trip as it would be a simple undocking from the asteroid, and in the meantime the images of the completely new environment would be broadcast around the world.

I would recommend the following order: one or two trips to an asteroid –> Moon colonization –> manned Venus flyby –> then decide whether to go to a destination like Ceres, or perhaps Mars or even Cruithne.