Slashdot Mirror


NASA's $73 Million Water-Finding Trick

An anonymous reader writes "The folks at NASA, obviously looking for new ways to explore the universe, are planning to crash a two-ton probe into the moon. The goal? To find water." From the article: "NASA plans a series of robotic precursor missions including the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite, or LCROSS, which will plow into the crater, and the mapper, called the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. When LCROSS strikes the crater, it is expected to create a hole 16 feet deep and send up a 2.2 million-pound (998,000-kg) plume of debris for sensors and cameras stationed on a second spacecraft to monitor. Dozens of ground-based telescopes, as well as possibly space observatories, such as the Hubble telescope, will be trained on the plume as well."

6 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Only $72 million? by NitsujTPU · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You know what would be amazing? If we could talk about technology on Slashdot again, and leave Bush out of the conversation. Seriously. What prompted you to say that? Was it political, or about technology (and the troll who tells me that technology is political should lay off)?

  2. Hubble by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Dozens of ground-based telescopes, as well as possibly space observatories, such as the Hubble telescope, will be trained on the plume as well.

    It does not look like Hubble will be around long enough. Without shuttle-based repairs, it is not expected to last more than a few more years unless it gets luckier than the Mars rovers.

    This collision mission sounds similar to the comet-crash mission last 4th of July, Deep Impact.

  3. Moon Missions by biocute · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One thing I like about Moon missions is we can see the results pretty much immediately, we can even see the mission via a telescope!

  4. Re:Couldn't they just.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I don't get it. What does the shuttle have to do with the moon, or finding water on the moon? If you were clever, you could say that Kennedy and a young lady could pilot the next spacecraft to the moon, or make a comment how under a dual-purpose mission strategy Kennedy and a young female astronaut have been selected by Bush for the Moon/Mars initiative.

    You see, Son, that is the thing about political humor. You can't just go sticking it in all willy-nilly where it doesn't fit.

    And the guy who responded to you with the W comment completely misses the joke and comes off looking ignorant. That's right dude, stick it to the Slashdot man! You are truely a rebel without a cause.

  5. KISS by Black+Copter+Control · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Couldn't a nice drill be constructed and landed gently to dig down 16 feet?

    But it would be 5 times as expensive, and 10 times more likely to fail. NASA can't afford either of those at this time. You also get to point way more instrumentation at the result, and almost the entire technology is already tested with the 'deep impact' probe.

    As for 'trashing' the moon, that's rather like saying that a mosquito is trashing my arm -- except that my arm has had far fewer mosquitos.

    --
    OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
  6. Re:THE DESTROYER OF WORLDS! by CmdrGravy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes certainly NASA should come around your house every time they want to plan a mission or spend some money and take time to explain it all to you v e r y s l o w l y indeed so you'll understand and be in a position to to give the yea or nay to whether or not they can go ahead with their plans.

    Of course if you weren't so stupid and could read all the information NASA provides for yourself without the massive expense involved in having NASA come and talk to you specially we'd all be a lot better off.