What is Digg?59 Comments
- mrgreenjeans, on 06/13/2008, -0/+18"I gotta go, dude!"
"No, don't!"
"I'm doin' it!"
"No! Don't ***** in the space-suit!"
"Uuunnngghh!"
http://www.wired.com/science/space/multimedia/2008 ... - bimtott, on 06/13/2008, -1/+13The suit seems to hold up well against the simulated Lunar Chubby Gawking Nerdy Space Teen.
- GrammerPants, on 06/13/2008, -1/+9The big O will cut funding to it for a while if he gets elected. China will get there way before the US goes back.
- angusm, on 06/13/2008, -2/+10Is that "social project" spelled W-A-R?
- spaceman84, on 06/13/2008, -1/+8Oh *****! NASA's got proton packs?! Moon ghosts, prepare to get a no-holds-barred savage ***** in 2020. We're takin' no prisoners.
- goalieguy314, on 06/13/2008, -0/+7Moon first for practice and testing, then mars
- inactive, on 06/13/2008, -0/+4el
oh
el
...ugh - matt510, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4In addition to what RogerStrong commented, I would also add that it will take longer because they are wanting to do much more. It isn't just a matter of bring back rocks and pictures this time, it is a matter of setting up a base... a telescope... reusable stuff. It takes much longer to figure out how to best do that.
- McHoffa, on 06/14/2008, -0/+4I just fail to understand why it will take 12 years to get there when we have already been there 36 years ago on ***** 1960s technology. It really makes no sense at all. Why shouldn't we be able to get there next year (other than funding)? Someone please enlighten me. And no stupid moon landing hoax comments please.
- fakekevinrose, on 06/13/2008, -4/+8I can't wait to jack off on the moon. I'm going to blow the fattest cosmic load.
- McHoffa, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3ok so they need money. Let's assume that whoever is president next gets us out of iraq (guess i mean obama) and lets NASA have some funding. How would it then take 12 years? It could be done in a few, we have the technology. We could get there much easier and faster than we could back then I would hope.
- Yage2006, on 06/13/2008, -0/+3Do a little critical thought and maybe research it a big on google even
The moon landing hoax myth is one of the dumbest and all based on *****. - RogerStrong, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3"They" being the US congress, which controls NASA's budget line item by line item, and makes funding decisions based on political rather than scientific or engineering criteria.
- RogerStrong, on 06/14/2008, -0/+3Because getting out of Iraq won't free up money for NASA.
The current administration has piled record deficit after record deficit on top of the national debt - the nation is in debt over it's head. Getting out Iraq now (as opposed to a couple years ago) merely leaves the US in this position, rather than making it worse.
NASA's budget is the first thing people want to cut when times are hard - they view it as "unnecessary". Times are hard, and they'll soon be a lot harder. (Not that NASA's funding gets restored when times are good.)
Obama's stated plan - a five year "delay" in space funding with the money diverted to education - will kill US manned space flight for a whole lot longer than five years. All those engineers and technicians won't be around five years later - they'll move on. The US will be starting over with a new untrained and inexperienced team.
Preventing major politically unacceptable job losses played a big part in getting funding to start Ares/Constellation even before the Shuttle is retired. The folks who made the external tanks and SRBs will simply switch to the new shuttle-derived tank and SRB designs for the new launchers. But once you lay them off - as Obama plans - you no longer have the political clout to get funding to hire them back. - SuperJimmyJimbo, on 06/14/2008, -1/+4no phasers? no holodeck? Intergalactic fail.
- SchmuckofNI, on 06/14/2008, -0/+2Better get there before the chinese do.
- goleopards1, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2Its true, Obama has come out and said he plans to cut NASA's budget and spend the money on federal education initiatives.
- RogerStrong, on 06/14/2008, -0/+2As I understand it, most of the time you don't want that shielding - not unless you have many tons of it.
The problem is cosmic rays. It isn't just that you need meters of shielding to stop them - it's that stopping them tends to kick up a storm of secondary radiation, which then itself has to be stopped. This can make inadequate shielding worse than none at all.
So, you stay behind your well-shielded storm cellar during a solar storm. (The center of your ship, surrounded by your food and water supplies at first, then in a module covered by dirt later.) You stay outside your shielding the rest of the time. - RogerStrong, on 06/14/2008, -0/+2Cost. This time they're doing it on a much smaller budget.
The big space budgets of the early 1960s were a knee-jerk reaction to Soviet firsts - first satellite, first man in space, first space walk, etc. But once the Gemini program got under way and the Americans were demonstrably ahead, funding dried up. Saturn V production was capped even before the first moon landing. Apollo coasted through the moon landings on what hardware was already in the pipeline.
This time around NASA has to do it on a much smaller budget, AND complete at station, AND run it after AND keep the Shuttle going at a billion dollars a launch for a couple more years, AND run more unmanned space probes and aviation projects. - m1zl3d, on 06/13/2008, -0/+1What sucks is the astronauts on the Space Shuttle don't really get to bathe and they wear pretty much the same clothing until they return. So, if this really happens they are screwed until they return.
Side note: I'm sure they wear Depends but I bet it still gets messy if this happens. - Waaaaalt, on 06/13/2008, -1/+2So did you mom, but...
- RaDeus, on 06/13/2008, -1/+2dont quite understand why they dont use ridgid suits, have to absorb more radiation, last longer and you can even put in a light weight Whipple shield...
- matrim2217, on 06/13/2008, -0/+1{waits expectantly for the comments about how people hope we actually go to the moon this time}
- goalieguy314, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Yeah but all of the technology was completely different.
- RaDeus, on 06/13/2008, -0/+1yeah thats what they said last time... but nooo... all they did was play in the sand, collect the sand and plant a mirror...
lets hope they do more this time around.... - bdbr, on 06/14/2008, -0/+1I read somewhere that modern automobiles have more computing power than the lunar landers did back then. It was truly an amazing feat that they did it successfully (multiple times) given the state of technology, and no doubt quite risky. We should be much better prepared this time around.
I was glued to the set the first time we landed on the moon, and I'm looking forward to seeing it again. - znavy264, on 06/13/2008, -1/+2Don't cross the streams!
- Atomic05, on 06/14/2008, -0/+1There are multiple reasons why we can't go to the moon quickly, the first being that designing, fabricating, constructing, and testing equipment capable of reaching the moon with live human passengers takes years, and even then the crews must be trained on it. We won't exactly be going on our old Saturn rockets now, will we?
Also, a great number of the minds that got us there the first time are either dead or retired. A lot of what it's going to take to get us back to the moon is going to be done from scratch. Along with doing much more than those original missions did and on a much smaller budget at that, I think twelve years sounds about right. - Soniti, on 06/14/2008, -0/+1Their clothes are made with some kind of silver polymer, so it keeps them fairly clean.. Plus, being in a cool, dry environment that the shuttle affords, I'm sure their bodily secretions are minimal..
- melonade, on 06/14/2008, -0/+1Very cool. The weird placement of the helmet on the suit makes me think of Big Daddy
- deadaluspark, on 06/13/2008, -1/+2Hey, this digg is a link to video of this stuff in action from a local news station near Moses Lake!
http://digg.com/space/NASA_Testing_Lunar_Rovers_in ...
or, if you dont feel like digging up a similar story, here's a link to the youtub video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFnFtt8lqBc - RogerStrong, on 06/14/2008, -0/+1The most they seem to have real plans for is an unmanned lander, set to arrive some time in the next decade. In other words, 45 years or so after the Americans and Russians did it.
The real race is between America (government) and America (private enterprise). - RogerStrong, on 06/14/2008, -0/+0China's space program is where the US was at the beginning of the Gemini program, 45 years ago. Except that where the US was launching every 6 weeks, China is launching every 4 YEARS. They're falling further behind.
- jOOlian, on 06/14/2008, -0/+0Big Daddy space suit, sweeeeet
- isaactwito, on 06/13/2008, -2/+2Why does that little fatty get to hang out with NASA engineers when us people who aren't fat don't get to? There are serious problems with America.
- BobbyMC, on 07/21/2008, -1/+1Dude, if they make a moon base they will inevitably station all sorts of people there outside NASA, and then people will start making videos of their time on the moon.
Just when you thought you had seen everything Youtube could ever offer. LUNAR KOMBAT - listrophy, on 06/14/2008, -1/+1Lunar Parkour? *drool*
- KaJuN4, on 06/14/2008, -1/+1I think the current spacesuits look more modern than these new ones they're testing.
- thashiz, on 06/14/2008, -1/+1"The NASA K10 lunar robot surveys simulated lunar landing sites. The robot runs on Red Hat Linux and performs highly repetitive, long-duration tasks..."
One would think they could use Windows for that... - inactive, on 06/18/2008, -1/+1That would be twelve years from NOW. not twelve years total. Dont beleive for two seconds that the government hasnt been itching to get to the moon since the last landings in the seventies.
Im sorry. But I call BS. - abajur, on 07/27/2008, -0/+0I doınt want to live this.I want to be in my home it is really horibal I hate flying.
http://www.onlineflashgames.org
http://www.bid-directory.net - rhololkeolke, on 06/16/2008, -0/+0The scarab is supposed to have treads not wheels but since this isn't the final version it doesn't have them yet.
- sumgi, on 06/14/2008, -1/+1Reminds me of this picture or one I saw like it years ago:
http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ecarlkop/livmoon/mijnb.jpg
vs.
http://www.wired.com/images/slideshow/2008/06/gall ... - mfhayes, on 06/14/2008, -0/+0Practice happened in 1969.
- Soniti, on 06/13/2008, -3/+2This had me laughing for at least 10 minutes...!
Hats off to you, good sir.. - Meehive, on 06/13/2008, -1/+0The ATHLETE looks a little top heavy.
- mfhayes, on 06/13/2008, -1/+0I'd rather go to Mars.
-
Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 