Space Penguin Could Hop Around The Moon

notdanielp writes "A robotic Lunar Penguin explorer could be hopping around on the moon by 2009, said Raytheon on Tuesday, as it unveiled the concept lander at an aerospace conference. The unmanned lunar device, in development for two years, is 3 feet tall and weighs approximately 230 pounds. It "hops" by reigniting small propulsion engines ... President Bush last year refocused the space program on sending people to the moon, Mars and beyond. Raytheon said the Penguin could be a robotic precursor to future manned space missions and that it was being proposed to NASA."

Comments

ill avoid the linux jokes...

[tont0r]

but am i the only one that is wondering why a penguin??? its cute, but wouldnt a 'rover' type thing do just fine? id really like for NASA to be more concerned with experiments and whatnot rather than what animal to choose for its fun space trip to the moon.

Huh?

[skelly33]

A robotic pre-cursor to manned moon landings? Why?

We were able to do manned moon landings for almost 40 years ago; has our know-how diminished, or are we just less determined than we used to be?

Re:Huh?

[justin12345]

When I take off my tin foil hat, I hear voices that tell me that the landings were faked. ;-)

Seriously though, I think the somewhat hair-brained presidential directive involves building a base there. Stands to reason a "jump jet" vehicle would be useful in that.

And finally, to get on my soap box: A lunar outpost and manned martian exploration really isn't that bad of an idea. Sure, they are arbitrary goals that could be done via robotics, but so was landing on the Moon in the first place. Its not like we didn't know what we would find. Doing things the hard way leads to problems, which lead to innovation. I for one would like more Velcro and Tang.

Space exploration is an example of humanity at its best. People who bitch about the cost should instead be bitching about our crazy defense budget, much of which goes to maintaining obsolete weapons that no one thinks will ever be even slightly useful again.

Re:Not

[wtmcgee]

What does Bush have to do with NASA's inability to repair debris issues on the shuttle?

Would throwing another billion at the problem have changed the outcome? No. Sorry, I despise Bush as much as the next guy but at a certain point, the "bush sucks" rhetoric gets old.

Re:Affordable?

[notdanielp]

Seriously, this is much more affordable only because we've already paid for the research.Not entirely. It can also be more affordable if the manufacturing processes for these tactical weapons technologies are already active. Which is cheaper, a production run off of an existing assembly line or building a new factory and then doing a single run?

Re:Not

[Spodlink05]

What does Bush have to do with NASA's inability to repair debris issues on the shuttle?

Where did I say he did?

Would throwing another billion at the problem have changed the outcome? No. Sorry, I despise Bush as much as the next guy but at a certain point, the "bush sucks" rhetoric gets old.

What anti-Bush rhetoric? The article summary said Bush had re-focused on the moon,mars and beyond. I simply pointed that Bush had cut NASA spending, which is a fact.

Neither did I suggest spending more money on the shuttle would solve the problem, it was just an example of the state of the current space program, i.e. not good.

ET foam failure rate way up.

[HornWumpus]

Related to the new (freon free) way they are applying foam to the external tank.

But nobody in DC wants to talk about killing astronauts to 'save the ozone'.