Google Lunar X Prize Options

[Phil Stooke]

Am I completely out of it, or is there no GLXP thread on here? I couldn't find one. Anyway, things are moving on it, so I thought we ought to have one.

For the record, I just turned down my second invitation to join a team. I'm staying as an interested observer on this - for now, anyway.

There is a forum at the GLXP site as well as team info. There are a lot of people with half-baked ideas of how to go about it. The real professionals are not doing much on the forum, just working behind the scenes.

At LPSC two weeks ago, Bob Richards of Odyssey Moon invited people to propose instruments to carry on their rover - targeted to a pyroclastic deposit, probably Rima Bode or Sulpicius Gallus. And I see they have now signed an agreement to carry Celestis's lunar burials to the Moon. Richards will be here next week, and I'll be spending some time with him.

This whole thing is going to be interesting.

Phil

[Betelgeuze]

1969 Is not that long ago (heh and I'm only 21), I can understand if the next generations find this place interesting to revisit but this is hardly history. We have pictures and movies of the first steps on the moon, what’s a robot going to show us that those existing movies and pictures don't show already?! The place still looks exactly the same as it did 50 years ago, and you'll get exactly the same pictures as we did 50 years ago, the only difference is that they are taken by a robot instead of a human.
I agree that’s its a very important 'historic' place and I’m sure people would want to revisit it in the future, but what’s the point of revisiting it so early? It’s the only historic place that will stay the same for ages; I want to see something new now that we finally return!
We've been waiting more than 50 year for the next moon landing and we are aiming for the exact same spot to see the exact same things? How crazy is that?

Tbh I would be a lot more excited to see some never before seen landscapes; mountains, gigantic craters, strange rock formations, ice(?!),...

That's why we have museums like the Smithsonian and Natural History Museum

Exactly my point; if I want to see some human history I go to a museum or just look around me. If we go to the moon with a million dollar robotic mission I want to see something new, something 'non-human'.
We go to an unexplored alien world to look for 'human remains', oh the irony...

[Stu]

1969 Is not that long ago (heh and I'm only 21), I can understand if the next generations find this place interesting to revisit but this is hardly history.

Trust me, to an 8 year old kid, Apollo is ANCIENT history! And they're the guys we've got to inspire and excite and find a way to consider entering technology and engineering as careers if we're to leave footprints on any other body in the solar system before the next ice age, or send sample return missions to Mars, balloons to Titan and drills to Europa...

[Betelgeuze]

If pictures and movies from 1969 don't inspire them I'm not sure how new pictures of the same thing are going to inspire them instead. Hell, I don't think 8 year olds will be very excited about a robotic mission to the moon, knowing that humans did it 50 years ago.(that's actually depressing )

[Greg Hullender]

I don't think 8 year olds will be very excited about a robotic mission to the moon, knowing that humans did it 50 years ago.

Kids definitely won't be excited if they perceive that the adults around them seem more interested in preserving the old stuff on the moon than they are in discovering new things there. Or even building things there.

--Greg

[Stu]

Kids definitely won't be excited if they perceive that the adults around them seem more interested in preserving the old stuff on the moon than they are in discovering new things there. Or even building things there.

--Greg

I have to respectfully disagree, based on 30 years' front-of-classroom experience Greg. Many of the kids I've talked to in that time have been fascinated by the idea of "Museums on the Moon" because they're familiar with the concept and aim of preserving the past so it can be used as a reference. They're dragged around - sorry, taken to - museums quite often on school trips, so they know that it is generally felt important in society to ensure that "old things" of significance are preserved and protected. Surely, when we go to so much effort to preserve Roman pots, Greek coins and Egyptian mummies, wrecking an Apollo landing site would send out a message to kids that it wasn't such an important place, or event, after all..?

Besides, this isn't about preservation at the expense of exploration. No-one is suggesting for a moment that the Moon shouldn't be explored or built on; we're just saying that in the particular case of these rovers, they shouldn't be allowed to disturb, more than absolutely necessary, the Apollo landing sites, which are scientifically, historically and culturally significant. Think of it this way: if someone suggested to you removing all the barriers and guard rails in the Smithsonian to allow people to run their grubby, scratching hands all over the Kitty Hawk Flyer, and ice-cream and Coke-stained kids to climb over and into the Eagle capsule, would that be acceptable? No. There'd be absolute hell on if anyone suggested that. So I can't imagine why anyone would be happy to sit back and see the Apollo landing sites ruined either.

As others have pointed out there's a whole lotta Moon to explore - and build on - and I'm sure the vast majority of people here are in favour of lunar exploration and exploitation as soon as possible. But that exploration doesn't have to mean the desecration of the past.

I think the Google rovers project is a fantastic idea, with the potential to inspire a lot of kids, and I've already been in touch with one team about how I can incorporate their plans in my Outreach work to inspire kids about lunar exploration in particular and space exploration in general. But personally I'd be gutted if any of the rovers were allowed to tear around an Apollo landing site like the General Lee. There's no scientific benefit to be gained from that, not with the high-magnification, high-definition cameras available today. Here's my idea: land nearby, drive a bit closer, take your pictures of the LEM descent stage and rovers and flags from a respectable distance, get a killer front page shot of Earth shining above an Apollo landing site, then go look at new stuff, show us exciting landscapes and scenes we haven't seen before. It's not rocket science. Oh, okay, it is rocket science, but it's common sense too...

[Greg Hullender]

I have to respectfully disagree, based on 30 years' front-of-classroom experience Greg. Many of the kids I've talked to in that time have been fascinated by the idea of "Museums on the Moon" because they're familiar with the concept and aim of preserving the past so it can be used as a reference.

This is a place where I'd expect to see a big difference between British and US school kids, though -- and not just because you have more interesting museums, having 10x as much history to put in them. :-)

--Greg