Slashdot Mirror


Buzz Advocates Lagrange Point Spaceport

thrasymachus writes "Buzz Aldrin has an editorial in the New York Times (free reg req) advocating a spaceport at a Lagrange point between the Earth and the moon over simply more moon missions. He emphasizes the cost and practicality of such a station, as well its potential as a 'bridge to the heavens.'"

16 of 425 comments (clear)

  1. China, Russia and the Space Race by MURD3R3R · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am sure there will be legal battles about who can claim ownership of the lagrange points similar to the legal battles of Antarctica.

  2. I wonder... by IANAL(BIAILS) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder if the Chinese (and maybe even the Russians) would be willing to go into a partnership with us for this. They've already said they want to place a man on the moon by 2020, and with Bush's recent indications that the US may be following suit, I'm sure a little cooperation wouldn't hurt.

  3. The Moon or Lagrange? I still choose Mars. by Howzer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Interesting article, but it still doesn't address the "building complex things in space" problem. I mean, we're pretty good at building things in gravity, with an abundance of raw materials, but we just haven't built much of note in hard vacuum zero gravity where you have to truck everything you need there. Even the space station was flown in modular format from Earth - at huge expense. Lagrange points are cool - but planets are cooler.

    Everything you want to fly to somewhere else from a Lagrangian point you first have to fly to a Lagrangian point from some planet!

    Frankly, the best place from which to get to pretty much anywhere in the solar system (including the Moon!) is from the surface of Mars. Two reasons: you can build things there, and the cost in fuel is lower. Here's a table which uses deltaV (total change in velocity required and thus fuel) to illustrate this very point.

    First get humans to Mars, then the whole solar system is within reach.

  4. Re:Buzz on cable news by Keebler71 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wish people would stop blaming NASA. Place your blame with the politicians who allocate where the money is to be spent. The engineers at NASA are phenomenal and have chosen to work for far less than they could make in the private sector because they share our dream of furthering our exploration of space.

    --
    "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
  5. Related article: Possible moon voyage proposal by revscat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Return to Moon May Be on Agenda : "President Bush's aides are considering a new lunar exploration program and other unifying national goals, including a campaign to promote longevity or fight childhood illness or hunger, as they sift ideas for a fresh agenda for the final year of his term, administration officials said yesterday."

    Hmm. Perhaps they would like something to distract from the whole Afghanistan-Iraq thing, and the less than stellar results of those... And the Valerie Plame affair... and vote fraude through unauditable voting systems, like Diebold... and the massive budget and trade deficits.. and the declining value of the dollar...

  6. We can't even fund ISS by tinrobot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We can hardly get a space station built in low earth orbit. I would imagine building one at L2 to be even more difficult.

    Besides, how do you explain to the Amercian people that getting to L2 is an amazing accomplishment? They barely understand the moon and mars, forget explaining Lagrange points.

  7. Guess what's in space? Nothing! by kippy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sure this point was beaten to death in yesterday's story about moon missions, but space stations don't make much sense.

    We've already got ISS for better or worse as a 0g test lab. On the Moon, we could build a solar farm that would fill our energy needs on Earth pretty much entirely. We would also be able to get a telescope bigger and better than anything else in existence. Lastly, the Moon offers a nice balance of construction material and low gravity which would give us a great jump-off point to Mars and the belt.

    Speaking of Mars, putting people there would have more benefits than I care to type. New world for humanity, extraterrestrial science (possibly biology), easy access to the asteroids, ability to live off the land that can't be done on the moon or deep space...

    Another thing while I'm all steamed up, isn't the LaGrange point between the earth and moon L1? That's an unstable point that would probably require regular correction so it doesn't fall to earth or the moon. SOHO has to deal with issues like that. I would hope that they would at least think to put it at L4 or L5 for stability's sake.

    Could someone please enumerate the benefits of a L1 station cause I don't see them.

  8. Re:Buzz on cable news by TopShelf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wish people would stop blaming politicians, and point the finger squarely at the American public. People seem to gravitate mindlessly to tax-cutting messages, without considering the impact. Nobody wants to pay taxes, but they all want good schools, safe and well-maintained streets, etc. If the public got behind the idea of a space port or moon landing, the politicians would follow. It does indeed happen, even in these cynical times.

    --
    Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
  9. Lunar Surface makes more sense by L0C0loco · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First off you have to remember that Buzz is now in the spaceflight hardware business. While the Earth Moon L1 LaGrange point does offer intersting possibilites for being a gateway to the solar system, this really just sounds like another International Space Station. I worry about under utilization, a wandering mission objective, and massive operational costs. Not that a lunar surface base will be cheap. The big difference in my mind is the availability of raw materials on the surface. You won't have to launch as much mass from Earth. This would especially true if there really is water in the polar craters. Nevertheless, having a bunch of lunar soil to pile up for shielding would be a tremendous advantage. You also do not have to maintain the orbit of the moon (unlike an EM-L1 gateway). The other big advantage of the lunar base over EM-L1 is that once there you actually have things to do and places to explore. Just imagine having some large otpical, IR, and radio telescopes on the darkside of the moon - away from all of the earth-bound noise/light pollution. The possibilities are vast. Maybe we should go to the moon first and then build one of those carbon nanotube elevators from the surface to EM-L1 later.

    --
    -- Instant Karma's gonna get you! [320848 = 2*2*2*2*11*1823]
  10. Re:Buzz on cable news by gilroy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Blockquoth the poster:

    They kept Mir in orbit, functioning well, always manned, etc., for about fifteen years

    Not counting oxygen failures, several fires, and the odd collision with a supply ship. Mir functioned. It certainly did not function well. And keep in mind that the realistic, incremental approach is what gave us the Space Shuttle and the ISS.
  11. I pay my taxes knowingly and willingly by revscat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nobody wants to pay taxes, but they all want good schools, safe and well-maintained streets, etc.

    I think I'm the only person on the freaking planet who actually considers paying taxes a civic duty, and that pays them willingly and with the knowledge that it is in my best interest to do so. (And no, not in some "if you don't you go to jail" way, either.) Taxes pay for bad things, taxes pay for good things. I oppose the former and support the latter.

    Too many people are patriotic right up until you ask them to put their money where their mouth is.

    1. Re:I pay my taxes knowingly and willingly by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful


      The biggest problem with third parties is that they have to go for state legislatures first, and they don't. They always go for the federal seats and you can't hang onto that unless you control the states.

      Look at what the Republicans did. Yeah, Reagan won in 1980 and he was able to change the mindset of the country to the right a bit by using the presidency as a bully pulpit, but, real Republican dominance did not come until Republicans methodolically took control of many state legislatures, then governorships, and then, reworked districting laws in their favor, and then won the congress. Barring any disasters, they should hold the congress for the next decade.

      Against such a well coordinated plan, you have Green Party people like Ralph Nader that aren't really interested in winning for their party as much as they are about trying to get power for themselves. Really, my Republican Party is successful because not everyone wants to be president, and, we are willing to "take one for the team", in order to get our overall agenda passed.

      You don't see that kind of sacrifice on the left, where everyone wants to be a best seller, a pundit, or a president, and that is why you lose.

      The green party and the libertarian party will never be successful until it has people that are willing to be elected to state legislatures on local, practical, issues.

      --
      This is my sig.
  12. Nailed it. Mod up more. by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 4, Insightful
    They barely understand the moon and mars, forget explaining Lagrange points.

    This is the crux of almost all problems in our efforts to evolve any further as a society, be it a push into space or whatever.

    People are just plain ignorant. Not stupid. Ignorant. Most people I know never even crack open a book on ANY subject, much less something scientific. Sufficient scientific knowledge to graduate high school is knwoing the sky is blue and the ability to point to the sun in the sky. There's parts of the world where if you tell them the Earth revolves around the Sun, you'll get blank stares, and some of those parts are here in the USA. Smart people continue to be generally depicted in the media as outcasts and acceptable objects of ridicule.

    We won't be going to L4, L5, L2 or even the L-train unless knowledge (and especially scientific knowledge) starts getting more respct in this world.

    --
    --- Ban humanity.
  13. Re:Buzz on cable news by cyberlotnet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No blame the goverment.. We do need tax cuts but its not at the school/service level.

    The Military just got in trouble because of the number of people flying on our Tax dollars first class.

    The goverment bidding system for outsourced jobs is broken. Its supposed to bring in the lowest costing qualified bidder. Instead its perverted by politicians to support larger companys that donate money to there political fund. This results in multi-million dollar political campains, while our childen have to bring there own toilet paper to school.

    We spend billions defending a country over oil, yet we have millions without health care, homeless people and others things right here at home that money could of been used for.

    Look at this picture..

    If we spent less money putting pushing our beliefs on other countrys and defending other countrys, Not only would we have more money for our own people BUT we would have fewer people out there that thing america sucks.

    If we had not stepped in and beat iraq down during the gurf war.. Oil prices may have gone up for a bit but they would of done everything they could to get those oil fields back online to make money. There would be one less set of people who feel we got invovled in something we shouldn't.

  14. Re:Buzz on cable news by b-baggins · · Score: 3, Insightful

    -Nobody wants to pay taxes, but they all want good schools, safe and well-maintained streets, etc.-

    This is a false dilemna fallacy.

    The current tax rate is far in excess of what is needed to maintain infrastructure. Waste and corruption is horrendous, entitlement programs are needless and duplicated. Crap, just eliminating 10% of the waste in the federal Entitlement programs would net every man, woman and child in this country a 200$ annual tax cut.

    The real problem is that too many Americans have decided that someone else should pay for what they want. We have learned that we can vote ourselves money from the public largess.

    --
    You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
  15. Stable vs. unstable by jyung · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some reasons to pick an unstable point:

    1. L4 and L5 are stable and therefore tend to collect space junk - this is one reason why you would pick an unstable point (like L1, L2 or L3).
    2. Stable points are at the bottom of the proverbial energy well, and it would be harder to leave them then to leave an unstable point, which is "perched" at the top of the proverbial "energy hill".