[ExI] Moooon

David Lubkin lubkin at unreasonable.com
Fri Jul 22 18:07:08 UTC 2011


Spike wrote:

>Once you do the weight models, that conclusion is inescapable.  I (and
>others) realized over twenty years ago that any meaningful mission to the
>moon involving apes would need to be a one-way trip.  Otherwise your mission
>is short, desperate and scary, and you use up far too much of your payload
>in fuel to get back.  That being said, there is a lot of infrastructure that
>must be built before the first ape arrives, to make that even distantly
>possible.

Manned *missions* to the Moon are (mostly) a waste of time, and
manned travel to the Moon and back in a vehicle launched from
Earth is goofy. Likewise for Mars.

But men to the Moon or Mars and back through an appropriate
infrastructure of [ Earth surface <=> Earth orbit <=> remote orbit
<=> remote surface ] reusable transport is reasonable.

I'd like to see two (at least) parallel systems -- one for rugged cargo,
that can be subjected to harsh environments, that can take months
or years to get where it's going, and whose loss is more acceptable,
and one for payloads that are time-sensitive, fragile, or high value.

Much in the way we have parallel systems of planes and ships here.

I *would* sign up for a one-way trip to the Moon or Mars, but the
one that's most important to me is a one-way to an asteroid, where
your return is achieved by propelling the asteroid itself.


-- David.




More information about the extropy-chat mailing list