BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Laboratory >

First private Moon landing given go-ahead

  
 
Spatula Clarke
11:32 / 12.09.02
BBC report

TransOrbital of California has become the first private company in the history of spaceflight to gain approval from the US authorities to explore, photograph and land on the moon.

"The Moon is ripe for commercial development," said Dennis Laurie, of TransOrbital.

Beyond the orbital missions TransOrbital and Lunacorp have plans for lunar landers and rovers.

TransOrbital says it has the technology, the desire and now the licensing.

"It's a significant moment for our company," says Dennis Laurie. "People will soon get to experience the moon in ways they never imagined."

There's an obvious ethical worry here, but if we put that aside for the moment, is this just an inevitable and, unfortunately, necessary next step in off-world exploration?
 
 
sleazenation
11:52 / 12.09.02
correct me if i'm wrong but isn't the moon nutural territory and as such the US don't actually have any rights to grant anyone access?
 
 
Grey Area
12:08 / 12.09.02


...and am I totally paranoid or is that Mr. Pringle on the bottom of the satellite?

In all seriousness, I think sleazenation has a point...the moon is regarded as neutral territory. Maybe the US approval was neccessary because the company is based in America (even though the launch is going to be from Russia's Baikonur facility).

Links:
Transorbital (which includes a very facetious web banner mocking the ancient Egyptians)

LunaCorp
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
14:06 / 12.09.02
In answer to the original query, yes, I do believe privatization is the next step in realizing space travel and entrepeneurial ventures. After all. there's a whole universe waiting for us to strip mine it for parts, and I sure as hell don't see NASA accomplishing much in that regard lately. What was their last major thing, the Martian Rover? Woo. They put a remote control car on another planet. Go, NASA, go.
 
 
grant
14:50 / 12.09.02
I'm curious, though - where's the profit? What do private companies GET out of going to the moon?

Any ideas?

The fact that I can't see an obvious income stream freaks me out a little bit.
 
 
Saveloy
15:16 / 12.09.02
grant>

This makes me think they're talking tourism: "People will soon get to experience the moon in ways they never imagined."
 
 
cusm
15:21 / 12.09.02
There'a mining possibilities as well. Its also a good place to put a base if you have interests in other parts fo the solar system, like Mars or asteroid mining. But yea, initially, its a big tourist trap. Though I'm sure we'll find some industrial uses, even if its manufacturing plants we don't want to see on Earth due to pollution. Its not like there's an ecosystem to disrupt on Luna, is there?
 
 
Saveloy
15:42 / 12.09.02
Grey Area:

"Maybe the US approval was neccessary because the company is based in America (even though the launch is going to be from Russia's Baikonur facility)."

Given that they don't even have to launch from the States, what would happen if the company didn't get approval but went anyway, what would or could the authorities do? Send the cops up there?
 
 
MJ-12
15:42 / 12.09.02
I'd met someone who was involved in one of these concerns and they were looking at the initial revenue source as being box office on the documentary of getting there. Secondly, they were planning to set up transfer points in Low Earth Orbit, and ship H extracted from the lunar surface there for use as refueling stations for satelites with higher orbits, or destination further out, thereby providing cheaper net cost to orbit per kg of payload.
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
04:31 / 13.09.02
Of course, I still kind of hope someone carves the letters "CHA" or a portrait of Cobra Commander in the lunar surface. Just to fuck with people.
 
 
Hieronymus
04:53 / 13.09.02
And in related news...

I don't know why I find this so incredibly hilarious. But I do.
 
 
captain piss
07:58 / 13.09.02
Heheh- that's great - Buzz Aldrin hooks someone for saying he didn't go to the moon. Cue the obligatory jokes about seeing stars
 
 
8===>Q: alyn
14:24 / 13.09.02
What do private companies GET out of going to the moon?

Lots of money to be made in militarization. Use tourism & such to get there without too much international protest, and because procurring funds through capitalist action is much more effective than getting it from Congress, then the defense contractors start buying up land.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
23:36 / 14.09.02
The phrase 'government approval' seems pretty meaningless. It's probably just a clever PR job - 'approval' doesn't have to be anything more important than a phone call, asking "Is it alright by you if we land on the Moon?" Answer: "It's got nothing to do with us, mate. Sure, do what you like." Approval.

The US State Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have granted the company permission to send its TrailBlazer spacecraft into lunar orbit.

It'd appear that the only permission they've been granted is simply to launch the craft.

Related story: "What may then happen as costs come down is that space exploration ceases to be something done as national and international programmes but becomes something that is done in more boisterous and disorganised ways by private consortia and even individuals."

Welcome to the era of Reid Malenfant.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
14:51 / 15.09.02
On a purely selfish kind of note - I want to go in to space! Bring the commercialization of space flight on!

It always seemed inevitable that this would happen. I mean the moon landing in '69 stemmed from the race between the US/USSR and in a way the competition's just continuing because the Americans are being all let's not send civilians up there. The Russians are all this makes money. Now there's this odd link between the two through the commercial aspect of it all. I like it.
 
 
doglikesparky
17:04 / 15.09.02
If this does go ahead it should at least give us a definitive answer as to whether man has ever been on the moon.

What will NASA and the US Governemt have to say if they turn up and there's no flag there, or footprints or any of that stuff?

One way or the other, someone's gonna end up looking foolish....
 
 
8===>Q: alyn
16:06 / 04.10.02
I've just looked at this site a little more closely and I'm certain it's a completely hilarious con. It's the 21st Century version of selling the Brooklyn Bridge.
 
 
Mystery Gypt
16:53 / 04.10.02
there's no question we've been to the moon... the conspiracy theory is strickly about whether or not the first televised Apollo lunar landing was a fake. See the Aaron Ranen documentary "Did We Go" for hilarious details.
 
 
8===>Q: alyn
17:46 / 04.10.02
I meant the private company that will send your messages to the moon. They'll fire off your business card for $2500. I'm putting together a rival company that will send messages to Mars. Better yet, the sun! Future generations will read your message when we finally land on the sun. I'll get NASA clearance and everything, it'll be totally legit!
 
 
bjacques
19:41 / 04.10.02
Funny that the "fake" moon landing comes up
to day. I got a letter from someone who
believed that and thought I did too, after
he read this:

http://www.vermilion-sands.com/rantlib/greencheese.html

It was just a little something I threw
together when I was working at NASA and
heard a friend remark about tourists who
wanted to see the "zero-gravity" room
they'd seen astronauts using in training
for space.

Actually, it was the interior of the "Vomit
Comet," a plane that flies up and down to
simulate weightlessness for 30 seconds at a time.

I was nice about it.
 
  
Add Your Reply