• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Newt promises a permanent moonbase by the end of his second term

Have to say at least it shows some optimistic and forward looking vision, which is rather different from the "good old days visions" I've been reading from the various candidates.
 
Darat said:
Have to say at least it shows some optimistic and forward looking vision, which is rather different from the "good old days visions" I've been reading from the various candidates.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. It just shows he'll say anything to get a vote here or there.

How are we supposed to pay for this?
 
The New space program reminds me of the space program that the stupid, lying, idiotic former Preisdent George W. Bush Space proposed.

Bush talked about a Moon base and a manned Mars mission as well. However, Bush did not outlay any funds for it or even have ideas on how to proceed. Instead, he just offered lots of talk without any substance, and as a result, things went nowhere fast.

Therefore, I expect that the Newt space program will have similar results.
 
Crossbow said:
The New space program reminds me of the space program that the stupid, lying, idiotic former Preisdent George W. Bush Space proposed.

Bush talked about a Moon base and a manned Mars mission as well. However, Bush did not outlay any funds for it or even have ideas on how to proceed. Instead, he just offered lots of talk without any substance, and as a result, things went nowhere fast.

Therefore, I expect that the Newt space program will have similar results.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering, did Kennedy have a serious clue how we'd get to the moon in less than a decade when he proposed it?
 
Newt knows all about astronautics. He took up space in school.

(Rim shot!)

How can you pay for such a program? Tax cuts, of course! And you can cook the books a little, and--voila!--some debts simply don't get included as debts, because, well, they just don't. Hey, it worked for George W. Bush, didn't it?
 
Mike! said:
I'm wondering, did Kennedy have a serious clue how we'd get to the moon in less than a decade when he proposed it?
Click to expand...

Yep! He sure did.

Instrument, animals, and people were already going into orbit using rockets, so rockets were the way to get to the Moon. Also, the scope of the Apollo program was quite limited; get the USA to to Moon before the USSR just long enough to plant a flag and do a bit of scientific research (so that we could truthfully say it was actually a non-military program).

He was also prepared to outlay the funds for such a program as well.
 
The thing is, there's no really good reason to send a man to the Moon anymore. We know more about it now and there's nothing really useful to do there. He would be better off supporting the ISS or even a next generation ISS than a permanent moon base. Anything we want to do on Mars can be done cheaper and easier by robots. Newt criticizes Romney for being "only practical" when space exploration is an endeavor that cries out for practicality. The time for being romantic about space is long gone. Newt's grandiose space dreams are a far cry from a practical plan.
 
NoahFence said:
No it doesn't. It just shows he'll say anything to get a vote here or there.

How are we supposed to pay for this?
Click to expand...

How is it not an optimistic and forward looking vision? There's never been a moon base so that's forward looking and it indicates he thinks the USA in the future will be able to support such a programme so that is optimistic?
 
Going to the Moon is easy.

Getting on the ballot in your own state is hard.

Apparently.
 
RenaissanceBiker said:
The thing is, there's no really good reason to send a man to the Moon anymore. We know more about it now and there's nothing really useful to do there. He would be better off supporting the ISS or even a next generation ISS than a permanent moon base. Anything we want to do on Mars can be done cheaper and easier by robots. Newt criticizes Romney for being "only practical" when space exploration is an endeavor that cries out for practicality. The time for being romantic about space is long gone. Newt's grandiose space dreams are a far cry from a practical plan.
Click to expand...

It's a smaller gravity well to shoot stuff out from.
 
3point14 said:
It's a smaller gravity well to shoot stuff out from.
Click to expand...
You mean stuff that has to leave our gravity well to get there? If you get stuff out of our gravity well you lose energy by putting in the Moon's. Take it to the ISS then go out from there. The Moon also has other practical problems that make it a poor choice for a base when compared to the ISS. Moon dust is very abrasive because there is no erosion to round off the particles. Once you start tracking that stuff inside your base, seals and things with moving parts are going to start having problems.
 
RenaissanceBiker said:
The thing is, there's no really good reason to send a man to the Moon anymore. We know more about it now and there's nothing really useful to do there. He would be better off supporting the ISS or even a next generation ISS than a permanent moon base. Anything we want to do on Mars can be done cheaper and easier by robots. Newt criticizes Romney for being "only practical" when space exploration is an endeavor that cries out for practicality. The time for being romantic about space is long gone. Newt's grandiose space dreams are a far cry from a practical plan.
Click to expand...

First of all, it is never too late for wonder and romanticism of the universe.

Second, yes, the Moon holds little value in and of itself for research. However, as a launch platform, it would be very useful. We wouldn't have to worry about things like escape velocity when sending out our spacecraft (at least, not to the degree we do now).

And ISS could probably serve the same function. Each has advantages and disadvantages.




But, ya, Newt is just talking out his butt.
 
Crossbow said:
He [JFK] was also prepared to outlay the funds for such a program as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, let's not forget the astronomical (ahem) costs involved and the really unworkable budget proposal Newt has made which would vastly decrease current revenues. Newt can't say how he'd finance most regular government operations much less an Apollo-type of program!
 
RenaissanceBiker said:
You mean stuff that has to leave our gravity well to get there? If you get stuff out of our gravity well you lose energy by putting in the Moon's. Take it to the ISS then go out from there. The Moon also has other practical problems that make it a poor choice for a base when compared to the ISS. Moon dust is very abrasive because there is no erosion to round off the particles. Once you start tracking that stuff inside your base, seals and things with moving parts are going to start having problems.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of stuff made there to launch to the outer reaches of the solar system. Of course, that requires that there be material there to make stuff from

Now I think about it, let me try this...

Mercury. That would be perfect. All that metal and all the free energy. Relatively small gravity well. A mercury base would be useful.

Of course, it might help to learn to live off-planet somewhere slightly closer to home first...
 
3point14 said:
I was thinking of stuff made there to launch to the outer reaches of the solar system. Of course, that requires that there be material there to make stuff from
Click to expand...

Not to mention the technical and practical hurdles of extraterrestrial industrial development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom