Slashdot Mirror
Protecting the Apollo Landing Sites From Later Landings
R3d M3rcury writes "The Lunar X-Prize is a contest offering $20 million to the first private organization to land and maneuver a robotic rover on the moon. There is also a $1 million bonus to anyone who can get a picture of a man-made object on the moon. But one archeologist believes that 'The sites of early lunar landings are of unparalleled significance in the history of humanity, and extraordinary caution should be taken to protect them.' He's concerned that we may end up with rover tracks destroying historic artifacts, such as Neil Armstrong's first bootprint, or that a mistake could send a rocket slamming into a landing site. He calls on the organizers to ban any contestant from landing within 100KM of a prior moon landing site. Now he seems to think this just means Apollo. What about the Luna and Surveyor landers? What about the Lunokhod rovers? Are they fair game?"
We have a picture of it right? Seriously what if every time somebody did something new that spot was forbidden to be stepped on again? asinine. What if nobody as allowed to visit the beach of Columbus's first landing sites? BFD, send a plaque or something and stop wasting your time worrying about whether a footprint is going to disappear someday. It will.
/* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
How many places would remain if all those spots are banned? There are only so much good landing sites on the Moon.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
Erosion has probably already destroyed the first footsteps on the Moon.
it will darn near be just as special as the first time. it's been SO long since we've been there, in person.
the next footprint should be just as protected.
And keeping people away from the original "landing site" will keep them from figuring out that the first moon landing was faked by the government. (Or was it faked by our evil reptilian overlords? I can never keep that straight.)
I remember reading long ago, forget where, that official CCP policy was that if they were to arrive on the moon before the US returned, their first goal was to remove as much evidence of American landing sites as possible so as to claim the US had lied and in fact China was the first on the moon.
Probably some wharrgarbl from the intertubes stuck in my head, but who knows.
Great, now we'll need to deal with the lunar version of NIMBYs. I was personally looking forward to Hydrogen 3 and titanium surface mining on the Moon. I want vast robotic factories on the Moon so we can start mass producing segments for cylinder-type space colonies. I want to be able to retire in one of those space colonies.
It is a shame that some people exist merely to hold the rest of us back from our ideal Star Trek future with green alien babes.
If you want to preserve Neil Armstrong's boot print, perhaps it's better to send a mission exactly there and put a pane of plexiglas over it.
I can't imagine the bootprint lasting long if North Korea make it up there.
You think those were nuclear missiles they were firing? North Korea are planning the worlds first single stage rocket 'landing' on the moon, with their great leader strapped to the front because he is so awesome he can actually reduce drag.
Task Mangler
"The sites of early lunar landings are of unparalleled significance in the history of humanity, and extraordinary caution should be taken to PREVENT EVER BEING ABLE TO PROVE THEY EVEN EXIST"
This is ridiculous idolatry. It's not like there is something we *don't* know about these events, there is nothing to discover there, and hence nothing to protect, as opposed to an archeological site.
The first bootprint was likely obliterated by the lunar ascent engine exhaust on the way out. Hello!
Why not? I personally think that preserving the artifacts of the first moon landing should be considered important.
Though realistically.... Neil Armstrong's first boot print was most likely obliterated when the LEM blasted off.
There's a lot of moon up there. I see no reason to disturb the existing landing sites until we have the means to preserve them properly.
So, do you feel the same about Bletchley Park? It's not a simple question. There ARE things we sometimes like to see preserved for the awe inspiring value they have for posterity. I don't know about all the sites on the moon but I'd vote for the first landing site of anything ever (Russian?) and the spot where a human being first walked.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
whether a footprint is going to disappear someday. It will
If it hasn't been already destroyed. Wasn't the photo of where he first stepped on the moon next to the lander? Wouldn't the lander module have toasted the ground around it when it fired it's engines up to re-enter lunar orbit?
Of course, what is the point of preserving a site that nobody can really go to anyway? Sure, if someone went there, they could 'ruin' the artifacts that remain, but who cares? It's not like anyone can visit the site and appreciate it. The best you could hope for would be to preserve it for future generations' camera equipped robotic lunar rovers.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
We still have Armstrong's boot alongside other historically significant foot wear such as Dorothy's red shooes. We could attach the boot to the bottom of the probe and called it a restoration project.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I hope that I'm not the only one that is fed up with this modern approach to trying to preserve everything we ever do. Why can't we be happy with the knowledge that we did it? If I got a chance to see the first boot print on the moon I'd jump at it but would my life be any worse if that boot print accidentally got driven over, hardly. I'm not advocating that we should go out of our way to erase history just let it take care of itself.
I'd bet that 99.999% of the population probably didn't even realize that there was a first boot print still up there and now they will get all up in arms because it might at some point in the future get erased. Sigh. Give me a solution to world hunger, fusion power and a decent internet connection first and then I'll care.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
After all we explore wrecks on the ocean floors, the landers should be afforded the same status for scientific investigation.
As it is, We've still got Neil's boot, so we can make more footprints anytime.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
oh yeah? name one.
sigs... don't talk to me about sigs....
> doesn't mean we shouldn't make wildlife preserves
Mmm dodo jerky.
What a depressingly stupid machine.
So that's what happened to the Anasazi. Now, somebody just needs to go clean up the mess they left.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
True, but you also have weaker gravity, which will allow pressure from a rocket motor to have a greater effect than on earth
Pressure? I thought we were talking about a vacuum.
Also, debris will fly farther.
What debris?
The only debris is actually the crap coming out of the back of the rocket in gaseous form. I know you could try and make argument that this constituted pressure but since these are occasional particles wandering about in a complete vacuum you might as well model them as such since there are few enough to deal with.
As to whether they would disturb enough dust when the hit the moon surface to erase someones footprint that is any bodies guess as:
1) The module would have to get to certain height before the exhaust gasses could have a clear path to the ground due to the base section of the lander left in situ.
2) I have no idea as to how deep and well formed Neil's footprints were. The dust up there had not been touched so may have allowed his boot to sink quite deeply into the surface.
3) I have no idea of the relative mass of the exhaust gasses to the particulate dust that makes up the moons surface.
Basically, the only way to know for sure is go back and see. Unfortunately this may well result in discovering that the human races first footprint on the moon was perfectly preserved until we trashed it finding out if it was there. Why risk this outcome when the moon is plenty big enough for us to land somewhere else until we have the ability to build a museum around the area without disturbing it.
Disclaimer - Sorry, for being so nitpicky, but several years of Physics with Space Technology will do that to you.
I dont read
Pressure? I thought we were talking about a vacuum.
We're also talking about a rocket motor. The mass ejected from the motor nozzle exerts pressure on whatever it hits.
What debris? The only debris is actually the crap coming out of the back of the rocket in gaseous form. I know you could try and make argument that this constituted pressure but since these are occasional particles wandering about in a complete vacuum you might as well model them as such since there are few enough to deal with.
Observe the dust cloud
this may well result in discovering that the human races first footprint on the moon was perfectly preserved
The first footprint was at the bottom of the ladder. How many times did Armstrong and Aldrin go up and down that ladder? Face it, the first footprint is gone.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.