Has a hyperactive five-year-old taken over as the director of NASA? It sure seems like it. On Friday morning, an unmanned spacecraft launched in June will crash into the moon's surface. On purpose. Anyone not named Michael Bay is likely to ask why. Here's the answer: NASA wants to know if the twin impacts of the Lunar Crater Observation and its Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) will reveal any ice or water under the moon's surface. Finding out shouldn't be an issue. When the twin crafts hit the lunar surface at around 6,000 mph, NASA expects "plumes of moon dust — perhaps full of ice — (to soar) 6.2 miles high above the moon's Cabeus crater." Anticipation among the earthbound is running high. Lookups on "nasa moon bombing" are scorching the search box. Related queries on "nasa.gov" and "NASA moon mission" are also rocketing skywards. More than a few folks are wondering how much the soon-to-be-destroyed LCROSS costs. Answer: $79 million, according to Christian Science Monitor. Clearly, this is one of those cases where a picture is worth a thousand words. We're gonna go one better and show you a video from NASA. The animated clip shows what NASA expects to happen. The entire sequence looks a bit like one of Dr. Evil's satellites crashing into the Death Star. In other words, it's awesome. See it for yourself below. Source and Link to Video __________________ this should be interesting, very interesting.
At any rate, it's a hell of a lot more meaningful than the billions we spent on Iraq or the trillion plus we spent on the financial bailout... Seriously, colonizing the moon is the obvious next step in a world that is already pretty much claimed and saturated. The nation that gets there with "the firstest and the mostest" (historically erroneous quote attributed to controversial confederate general Nathan Bedford Forrest, whose innovative mobile cavalry tactics won praise from friend and foe alike) will win on subsequent mineral and mining rights. Consider that China is now hoarding many of the rare earth minerals (which is why the PRC so tenaciously holds onto Xinjiang; it ain't because of the sand or camel dung), and Bolivia holds more than 50% of the world's reserves of lithium, the commercialization of the moon is going to be a foregone conclusion. Realizing or proving that water (within scientifically easy access) exists on the moon is the first step to providing oxygen and water to potential long term mining colonies.
maybe the cost of disassembling the aircraft and reuse certain parts will incurr a higher cost than crashing it? -bigsmiles
It sounds like a waste to be honest. Isn't there any other alternatives then crashing into the moon? Like sending some sort of craft to drill deep into the moon surface
79 billions seem very less to NASA, considering the many failed missions and such. But why the moon. It seems like the least possible location for valuable minerals except iron
considering that we are still in a recession why spend millions of dollars to find water on the moon when we can't even keep people from poverty
how about blah blah whatever whatever, this is just publicity stunt to satisfy sheeple concerning what nasa is supposedly doing with your tax payers money. you can be sure that whatever we are told is 100 year old news.
