Slashdot Mirror
Moon Express Gets FAA Approval For Lunar Mission In 2017 (networkworld.com)
coondoggie quotes a report from Network World: The Federal Aviation Administration this week granted permission to a privately-held space firm to launch a robotic spacecraft to the moon. Moon Express expects to launch its MX-1 spacecraft on a two-week mission to the lunar surface in 2017. The MX-1, which is about as large as a suitcase will include instruments and a camera to explore the moon's surface. Moon Express has a contract with Rocket Lab USA for 3 lunar missions between 2017 and 2020. They are the first private company to receive permission to go to the moon. "Moon Express applauds efforts underway by the U.S. Congress and Executive Branch to establish a permanent regulatory framework to authorize commercial activities beyond Earth orbit," said Moon Express cofounder and CEO Bob Richards. "Our 'Mission Approval' process is an interim arrangement that can be implemented quickly enough for our 2017 launch requirements, allowing us to continue to execute on our business plans under U.S. law while ensuring our activities are consistent with U.S. obligations under the Outer Space Treaty."
I think Elon has deliver methods covered. What we really need are more probes and some rovers, mostly probes probes and more probes. We have should at least least one probes orbiting every planet. It's not a huge goal and it makes good sense... national security and all right :)
Seriously, they had "Planet Express" right there and they went with "Moon Express"?!
Finally the plan in the old belgian comic (Z Comme Zorglub) becomes reality . The villain paints the moon into a giant billboard for Coca Cola ( http://www.spirouworld.com/zor... )
The Outer Space Treaty states that outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. The Treaty establishes the exploration and use of outer space as the "province of all mankind."
Doing things for the ultimate purpose of improving man's knowledge or skills or whatever brings to me a sense of delight, but doing something with the ultimate purpose of increasing someone's bank account seems so primitive that I just don't give a fuck. Practically speaking, almost all scientific and technological breakthroughs have been publicly funded anyway, so this is just an improbable inefficiency.
its the fucking moon, nobody has jurisdiction there. what few relevant treaties there are aren't worth the paper they're printed on. absolutely unenforceable and not every country is a signatory or has internally ratified it.
the "permission" received from the FAA is for the launch and travel through u.s. airspace.. not to 'go to the moon'.
Doing things for the ultimate purpose of improving man's knowledge or skills or whatever brings to me a sense of delight, but doing something with the ultimate purpose of increasing someone's bank account seems so primitive that I just don't give a fuck.
So, you live off the land, have no job, and pedal a bicycle around for transportation?
Damn near everything we do or engage in ends up "increasing someone's bank account". Working, buying food, gas...hell, even the very medium we are communicating on right now is lining some ISPs pockets, along with the manufacturer of your computer, wireless router, cable modem, A/C unit, drywall maker, clothing, furniture...
So is there any plan at all for habitation? ( other than the pie-in-the sky dreams and drawings just for PR releases...)
Is there any coherent cooperation of ANY of these dreamers and planners?
In short: seen it before, nothing was the result, why is this one different?
"performing post-landing relocations through propulsive ‘hops"
WTF? They couldn't even design something with some robotic legs that would slowly, but continuously, push it along the lunar surface, and prevent it from ever getting stuck? (I'm thinking of simple legs that go in and out of the body, on all sides, maybe eight of them, so it can push in any direction it wants to.)
When are we going to see live 4K footage from the moon? 2100? 3000?
Oh no, (M)oon (X)press, not to be confused with (Minuteman) (X)perimental which are ICBM's.
You can't launch something like this without somebody noticing so by getting approval that should, in theory, mean that nobody panics that some bad guy is trying to launch a primitive ICBM towards who knows what and thus the rocket isn't shot down.
Saying he isn't inspired by something is not the same as saying he refuses to participate. It's just the difference between participating out of need and participating out of joy.
He has a point as well - imagine if big pharma today was mostly run by CEO's with the same attitudes as Jonas Salk: "screw patents, screw profits, I make a nice middle class salary as a professor - I'll just give my vaccine away so I can save more lives sooner". Imagine if anti-retrovirals were never patented, always sold at cost - how many millions of lives could we save ?
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Saying he isn't inspired by something is not the same as saying he refuses to participate. It's just the difference between participating out of need and participating out of joy.
He has a point as well - imagine if big pharma today was mostly run by CEO's with the same attitudes as Jonas Salk: "screw patents, screw profits, I make a nice middle class salary as a professor - I'll just give my vaccine away so I can save more lives sooner". Imagine if anti-retrovirals were never patented, always sold at cost - how many millions of lives could we save ?
If Big Pharma chose to sell damn near everything at cost or give it away, ever wonder how many millions of lives would be affected by a lack of employment, along with an economy not being fueled by that spending?
Funny thing about profits...tends to create jobs, bankroll paychecks, and feed the economy.
And in order for your world to exist, Big Pharma would have to obtain damn near ALL R&D funding from the government, because they would be turning NO profits of their own. Would our country be doing better with a few hundred trillion in the debt bucket, all while supporting millions on welfare due to a massive decrease in employment opportunities? I think not.
Yes, Big Pharma is greedy as all hell, and could use some reform to help the masses as you've pointed out. But this sure as hell isn't the answer.
Sorry but most of human advancement is done not with lofty intents but with personal gain (at least in a minimal way) in mind. People simply can't sustain themselves solely on their laurels. And while you are true that most technological breakthroughs are funded by the government, they are almost always fulfilled by profit driven individuals. Earth shattering breakthroughs won't be made by private space exploration alone to be sure, but government can often utilize the capabilities and economies of scale offered by private enterprise to make more breakthroughs. Just look at a lot of NASA's aircraft, while some are custom built a lot are re-purposed commercial/military aircraft
I wasn't saying that WAS the answer - I was just pointing out that the current system HAS killed millions of people needlessly, not speculatively as your numbers - actual corpses.
Oh -and there is absolutely ZERO reason why such a scheme would lead to job-losses, since cost includes wages, nobody said they should sell it at a loss.
I wasn't arguing what the best type of reform would be - just contrasting the success of the non-profit motive drug with the very profit motive drug in terms of lives saved.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
I guess I'm just not grasping the commercial advantage of sending a roomba to the moon and leaving it there.
I'm presuming this is only necessary because they intend to launch from the US? I mean its not like the US have declared they control the moon or something right?
Bring me back a Big Mac
Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
Huh?
Did I miss some major news bulletin or something? When did our moon escape the Earth's orbit?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'