Added: 4 years ago
From: xprize
Views: 141,425
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (275)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Who's footing the fuel bill for this challenge, the participants themselves? Nobody's going to spend 180 million in fuel and R n D just to make Mack 30 mil this is retardeds.

  • Awesome!

  • they probably should've thrown the money they used for this video into the pot while they were at it, but I'm a little more optimistic: if this xprize pans out in the near future, say five years, there's a decent chance people will give up on NASA and we can finally scrap the damn thing. That would be something :D

  • $30M = pretty much free publicity for google. If you guys really want to stimulate private space exploration, you need to make it at least a few hundred million.

  • @slackeriii2 actually, the smaller the amount the greater will be the chance of innovation that will drive down costs of such a program. It could ensure efficiency (cheaper) and thus a more sustainable re-landing for follow up missions

  • @gudsaute We're talking about a $30 million prize pool here, including 20 million for first place ... Efficiency and driving down costs is great and all, but 20 million dollars makes about as much difference as if there was no prize at all, considering this is aerospace research and development, the most expensive and complex endeavor people have pursued so far.

  • tha lander is pretty simple to make, but who can make the rocket?

  • @maxotromeros

    Why use a rocket when you could use a solar powered rail gun?

    It's not manned, yet.

  • The Google Lunar X - the next UAC. The corporation that was responsible for dooming Mars and Earth.

  • what a show. why didnt ya just get bubba to build a rover with camera's in his garage, find someone else for a decent but inexpensive lander, hitch a ride up from someone heading that way and just sling it towards the moon. we would have already been viewing the video's and pictures of the lunar landscape we dont have. this contest started in 2007 and doesnt get decided until 2015. how many years later then before you send it. i'll probably die of old age before it ever gets there

  • I hope the Armadillo team wins, headed by the legendary game designer John Carmack!

  • This is so sad, the fact that most people rather blow each other up then work together to achieve the next level of human civilizations, this should be called

    "Human 2.0: The struggle"

  • the registration day end or it follows open???

  • I thought capitalism, free market etc were so great.. how come they cannot land a useless crap to the moon?

    A wait free market is a hoax. it is just socialism for the Rich.

  • I wish i had a sponsor. I could win that within 2 years

  • @skinnywhop87 Ha! I'm sure of it.

  • Wow, I love Google! This is so cool! So inspirational!

    I'd also like to add that I think it's quite sad to see NASA's funding being withheld. What happened to NASA's Constellation moon base plans and the mission to Mars?

    Oh, what? Too expensive you say? Google seems to be able to do it...

  • Getting to moon. Heavy risk... but rhe PRIIIZE!

  • I really hope that the Google X-prize helps humans return to the Moon for good !! So by the time my son is 21 or 26 ( 2020 or 2025) we have permanent Moonbase Alpha ! Since 1973?! It is way overdue time we left LEO !! Humans on the Moon and Mars all before 2030 !!

  • The only way to save the planet environmentally, and economically is to get man back onto the moon permanently. Any effort private, or otherwise, is commendable. Set arguments aside and listen to the merits of the plan to provide a solution to the worlds most pressing problems. Once the merits are made clear, I think anyone cannot avoid the importance of the moon in mans very near future.

  • I'm so entering this competition!

  • Oh, I almost missed "it's gonna be a looong lunar night". Jesus Christ. This is like a parody.

  • You've obviously got your head so far up your ass you can't see daylight, my condolences, please realise that everything that you 'think' you know is wrong, and try again.

  • Got my head so far up my ass? Please, PLEASE show me where I'm wrong. Yeah, I'm sure we're going to build a bunch of fucking solar panels on the moon from this to send energy back to earth. I don't just "realize" everything I think is wrong when some asshole tells me to. You've got to show me how you think this shit is viable. What monetary incentive does any company have to put anything on the moon for the extreme cost? Why can't they put a man in orbit 50 years after the soviets did it?

  • @thomasford

    "What monetary incentive does any company have to put anything on the moon for the extreme cost?"

    Tourism, government financing, moon rocks (they are extremely expensive right now), etc. There is money to be made, if you can reduce costs enough. The whole point of the X-prize is to try to incite breakthroughs by getting lots of different groups to take a stab it at it utilizing lots of different ideas; collectively they end up spending a lot more than the prize is worth.

  • @thomasford "Why can't they put a man in orbit 50 years after the soviets did it?"

    Virgin, the winner of the first X-prize, plans for Spaceship 3 to achieve orbital flight and I doubt Virgin is the only private company that will now be attempting to create a low Earth orbital vehicle; Obama's new plan for NASA in effect creates a vast new prize for a shuttle replacement, such that further X-prize incentives for the low Earth orbit arena are unnecessary.

  • You know, people probably read my comments here and think that I have something against privatized space exploration. I really honestly hope that you're right. Of all of the things I could be wrong about, this is one of two things that I would be really happy to be wrong about. But tourism as a profit motive for space sounds like b.s. to me. I seriously doubt that there's a huge market for that. Moon rocks? May be valuable, but are they valuable enough to fund a mission there for?

  • @thomasford Again, the whole point is making space operations cheaper so that they are commercially viable. The first X-prize was a true success, after 8 years.

    That is auspicious, but it doesn't mean the other prizes will be successful as well; that has yet to be seen. I do consider them to be worth a shot though.

  • I also doubt that Obama's plan creates incentives. He talks a lot about it but doesn't say anything specific. Unsurprising if he isn't just saying nice things to placate certain people and this will just be the end of Americans in space for the foreseeable future. You doubt Virgin will be the only ones to do this? There's a reason we've only heard of them and a select few other on the news. This isn't like music or art. Launching a space vehicle is big news. No underground indie space launchers.

  • @thomasford "I also doubt that Obama's plan creates incentives."

    Your apparently not thinking this through much. Obama's plan calls upon NASA to pay private companies for low Earth orbit launches; hence, there are billions of dollars at stake here. You don't think Boeing or anyone else will make a stab at getting that kind of money? As for why we haven't heard of it yet, Obama just announced this. Before it, the pot was far smaller.

  • I really hope you're right. And your position does make a lot of sense. I just know from experience that, if you go with the most pessimistic prediction in politics, it's most likely right. I do like your point about the pot being much smaller before. I guess nasa is still artificially increasing the push for space, which is good for the overall momentum. I'm just sort of bitter and scared that no purist movement for space really is in charge anymore. Free market is pretty short sighted.

  • @thomasford We've had tons of private satellites in orbit for a while now, launched into orbit by private rockets, so private industry is not entirely new to space, and thus far what it has done up there has been beneficial.

    "Free market is pretty short sighted."

    Good government gives the free market glasses. Unfortunately, even in Western Europe, this doesn't always happen to the extent it should. It's a challenge to strike the right balance, especially with special interests involved.

  • I'm well aware of the private satellite launches. I've had this exact same argument before. But I really don't see the connection. Everyone just thinks "satellites are in space, therefore private companies are on their way to going to the moon and putting people out there". But there is an obvious profit motive for putting satellites into space. There's a lot of money to be made when it comes to communications. What's the profit motive for putting people in orbit or anything on the moon?

  • Well that was primarily a response to your criticism of space operations becoming "impure".

    Without drastic cost cuts, there seems to be little potential of equivalent profits being made beyond Earth orbit. With drastic cuts, mining and tourism may be practical.

    Until then, things like moon operations are only a practical model so long as government money backs them up, in which case the ultimate goals would have mostly to do with prestige and development of capability, not wealth.

  • That is why venture capitalists fund these start ups despite the high failure rate.

    The X-prize is in a way even more efficient because it entices a bunch of different start ups while only paying for one of them .

    It is a lot different in the sense that it is a non-profit and isn't an investor because it doesn't gain any ownership. The whole point is to get something done, and as we have already said, the potential for large profits isn't always as clear.

  • @thomasford Its not about space tourism the end goal is space settlement. The simple question is if there are people willing to spend 20 million for a few days in space how many people do you think would be willing to spend 20 million for a permanet homes on a space station. If you think that's crazy talk your not aware of the numbers. Spacex is getting the price of launch down to near 2grand per kilo or 1 grand a pound. 1 million to get a person into orbit and 19 million per room on a sstation

  • @MikDonsen

    I could literally use those exact same numbers against your argument. 1 million dollars to float around in low fucking orbit. I know what the end goal is. But companies don't do long term commitments. They would need a stepping stone. Space tourism is supposed to do this. But how fucking successful is a company that is selling millionaire rollercoaster rides going to be? Privatizing space will never work. There is no immediate business incentive and no market.

  • @thomasford Privatization leads to innovation, innovation leads to better technology, better technology leads to better lifestyles.

    I'm sure WW1, 2 & the Cold War agree with this statement

  • @thomasford oh and a response to a earlier statement you made.

    >> But how fucking successful is a company that is selling millionaire rollercoaster rides going to be? <<

    $50 million in already paid deposits sounds pretty successful for a product yet not available.

  • @thomasford the profit motive as you say. Is the moon & planets are rich in minerals and ores some of which are rare here. Also asteroids would be rich in metals. There be alot of money floating out there for those who have the determination to go out there and get it. Zero G also open up the possibilities for different manufactoring techniques which are impossible or diffucult within earths gravity.

  • @ScribeOfShadows

    Uh, there's something called a cost/benefit ratio. I promise you, shooting tons of metal and people and equipment at speeds faster than a bullet out of earth's gravity and millions of miles away and then back costs WAY more than some iron ore you might bring back.

  • @thomasford wow you really do think inside a small box.

    I never said iron, There materials out there rare to earth is what I said. But hey whatever.

    Also emerging technologies is reducing the cost of putting people/equipement in space. Plus if they perfect the space elvator concept & technologies required for that then we could ship people/materials into space for fraction of what it costs today. So your cost/benefit ration arguement requires us not to advance technologically to be valid

  • @ScribeOfShadows

    I would hardly call my argument flawed just because you have some far fetched ideas. And the space elevator is probably one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. I don't know how shit like that ever gets real intellectual support. And I think that you are vastly underestimating the cost of space travel, even at extremely optimistic, sci-fi levels of technology, vs. the benefit of mining ANY materials. And it's far too long term for any private company to reach for...

  • @thomasford wow you really are just a nay-sayer aint you.

    No progess you say, oh wow I guess the fact the x-prize was won by launching a vehicle from a plane = no progress. Or the fact that the commerical sub orbital flights are due to start in next year or two once testing has finished = no progress. You have a funny definition of no progress.

    Oh and a space evevator would save on massive fuel costs and could be used to supply massive amounts of energy = dumbest idea. Wow just wow

  • @thomasford " And I think that you are vastly underestimating the cost of space travel, even at extremely optimistic, sci-fi levels of technology, vs. the benefit of mining ANY materials. "

    Current cost about $140k per pound to put into orbit. But a half kilometre asteroid has the potential to be worth $150 billion. A kilometre asteriod has potential to supply the world's steel demands for a year, gold/silver demands for a decade & platinum for a millenia. So ALOT of money up there.

  • @thomasford also sending materials back from mining asteroids/or the moon would only require little energy to break away from their repective gravity wells. Which could be acheived with a railgun design to provide kinetic energy to break away from the gravity of the object.

    So the initial outlay is getting to the mineral and mining it and very little for sending back to earth. So also that part of your arguement is slightly flawed.

  • @ScribeOfShadows

    ... because investors tend to like it when, you know, they get a return on their investment sometime in their own lifetime. I haven't been impressed with ANYTHING the private sector is putting out. They make shitty little fiberglass craft that they try to launch from airplanes and into suborbital high atmosphere flights. And they've been doing that shit for about a decade now with NO progress other than lots of rosy promises and vaporware.

  • @thomasford I'm just confused why you come to a video like this just to be so negative.

    But hey your entitled to your opinion, I don't think its a very valid opinion & that you may have to change it in the next decade or so.

    Oh and I do know the current costs of putting material in space but I also know they are trying to cut that cost all the time. I think you vastly underestimate what is achievable with the right intellectual support.

  • @thomasford Well since you are not impressed by anything the private sector done. SpaceX a private company put a capsale in orbit and retrieved it again last month, something only 3 governments have done so far. They also going start carrying up astronauts and supplys upto ISS in place of the space shuttle after it retired. So much for your no progress bullshit.

  • Oh, oh nevermind. You're that douchebag that was talking about free energy. Nevermind. Go right on believing your stupid shit. Doesn't bother me. Just thought I'd let you know you were a retard.

  • You're the douchebag that was insulting other peoples opinions, not me, plus you seem intelligent enough, why don't you do a lot more reading and tell me why we haven't been back to the moon, or have we.. hmmm, what do you really know, who was/is NASA comprised of mostly, google project paperclip & secret space and tell me that you trust what they're saying, don't buy the cover story 'cause that's all it is. BTW free energy is possible since the early 1900's.

  • Fuck off.

  • Nice, really intelligent, why don't you go back to eating twinkies and playing videogames in your parents basement you Troll aspiring to be a shill, (look it up), have a great day, Peace and Love!

  • I know, I know. I'm becoming more and more troll like as the days go by. You want to know what causes it? Being weathered by the world. After a while, you get tired of explaining your position to people that it's not going to make a difference to anyways, so it's just easier to tell them to go die in a fire and all that jazz.

  • Oh, and this video sucks. Cheesy $5 stock "inspirational" music and terrible acting and dialog. "Would you look at that". Yeah. Alright. That didn't sound like shit at all.

  • A $32 million prize. They'll spend at least $50 million getting to there. That's a hell of a conservative estimate. I don't understand why everyone's getting so fucking excited about private space travel. You want to know how much progress the private sector has made on it's own (that is, not commissioned by nasa like lockhead or boeing?) not shit. They made a few fucking glorified high-altitude flights. Where's the monetary incentive for anything other than LEO for satellites?

    |Continued|

  • What the hell are the private corporations going to do on the goddamn moon? There's nothing out there that is worth enough to make the trip there and back for. Companies don't make long term, 25+ year commitments with billions upon billions of dollars for things that we don't have any reason beyond speculation to believe will have a return. Space tourism? Give me a break. Just because nasa existed doesn't mean private industry couldn't have done this years ago. But they didn't. Hmm, wonder why?

  • @thomasford There's lots of water and minerals you fucking retard.

    Ever head the analogy "Don't judge a book by it's cover?"

    Yeah, well guess what!? IT'S TRUE!

  • Argentina tiene que intentarlo, privado o no por que aca muchos ricos que yo sepa no hay

    pero argentina lo tiene que al menos intentar

  • Very nice and inspiring and all.. however, can the teams use forbidden power sources, (cold fusion, plasma, zero point energy), can they use non traditional ships, (saucers), and what's going to happen when they find all the ancient bases up there, is the public finally going to get to see what's really up there or still not....?

  • God you're fucking stupid.

  • I would like to see a return to the moon based on science (as indeed Apollos 13 and onward essentially were), and not a rivalry between countries.

  • I hope that this X Prize will change the world just the the others.

  • Revolution through a fair and educated competition...

  • lollolol

    people like you are so fucking funny!

  • great

  • great

  • Silicon for solar panels? What about Helium 3 for cold fusion? The reactors already exist. We just need the fuel. It would be far more powerful than any solar technology and it's far more valuable.

  • We don't have the reactors because cold fusion doesn't work. Indeed, the US patent office has banned aplications of cold-fusion based technology, because the science just isn't there.

    Even though, He3, and, indeed, Tritium, which is als believed to be found on the moon, is also seriously useful.

    Oh, and quantumG, you really have introduced a new level of retard onto the internet. Shut up and go die in a hole.

  • You're thinking of regular fusion. Regular fusion releases a dangerous neutron for every hydrogen molecule in the reactor which causes severe damage to the reactor walls. However, cold fusion releases a harmless proton for every He3 molecule instead. There are cold fusion reactors out there. There is one in the Wisconsin Institute of Technology and there's one in the russian space program. Both work and are highly efficient. That's why the russians are so hellbent on getting back to the moon.

  • Heh, I remember this video. It's about as realistic as the prize.

    1. Interest in launch watching goes up 100,000%

    2. The rocket is so damn fast that it can get the lander to the Moon in seconds.

    3. Doesn't even need a stage to enter lunar orbit.

    4. The lander doesn't even have a main engine.. apparently RCS is all you need to land on the Moon now.

    5. Uplink antennas only need to be the size of your typical hand held umbrella.

    6. The rover doesn't need to fit in the lander.

  • 7. It doesn't even need an antenna.

    8. Rutan is great, all hail SpaceShipOne. The reusable, reliable, less expensive revolution is here! It's so reusable it never flew again.

    9. "The competition ignited a revolution that will launch thousands of civilian passengers into space." Any day now.

    10. "The Moon.. only days away" .. way to point out your own spin-doctoring, see point 2.

  • Breaking news!

    90% of youtube users are retarded.

    Great job on the prize guys, good to have hope for the future.

  • boosh! what if you just build a giant gun and shoot the moon? thatd be easier, but would it count?

  • ...........why dont they just say what they mean? man i think my brain exploded..........in one ear and out the other

  • Ugh.

    This video is horribly sacharine and these comments are idiotic (as always).

    Oh well, at least the competitions a good idea.

  • Right. I love gimcrackery.

  • I am actually attracted to disney and spielberg movies.

  • giant

  • Google bought out Youtube and has been censoring highly informative FYI stuff on Youtube eve since.

    They are all in cohootch together!

    So now, corporate thugs are going to use Google to stage another hoax.

    The hoax will be to convince us that men "really" went to the fucking Moon.

  • Show some proof of this if you want to be taken seriously. If not, STFU.

  • (1) Moon anomolies and inconsistencies:

    1. no stars

    2. flag waving

    3. no blast crater from lander

    4. no concentric sun spokes in lunar astronauts visor

    5. no visible exhaust from LM

    6. inconsistent shadows on the moon

    7. astronauts coached to say talk when prompted

  • (2) Moon anomolies and inconsistencies:

    8. 11 astronauts die within months of one another

    9. how could they survive deadly radiation

    10. lighting hot spots on the moon

    11. indentical backgrounds in different images

    12. camera cross hairs behind the images

    13. astronauts refuse lie detector test

    14. Grissom's son cites sabatoge

    15. Government investigator and his family killed and his report disappears

    16. Astronauts only able to do one foot leaps and bounds.

  • I don't want to see no lander as proof. Show me the foot prints.

    I want to see FOOT PRINTS OF SOMEONE WALKING ON THE FUCKING MOON!!!!!!!!

  • Watch the Apollo videos then.

  • I watched the Apollo movies. Go to the comments page and I will show you what I have found.

    The chit was the most expensive hoax ever perpetrated against mankind. You people need to take your heads from outta your azz and wake the fuck up already!

  • curea229, is that all you got?!!! Calling someone a fool hardly qualifies as a valid argument for establishing facts and evidence.

    By calling me a fool, the only thing that you have managed to do is to take credence away from whatever silly argument you are trying to make.

    Now continue isolating yourself in your grandma's basement.

  • Hey genius, check out this shuttle pic with "crosshairs behind image" and "no stars."

    Google "space-shuttle-challenger.jpg"

    So the shuttle must be faked in a studio too, and the Challenger and Columbia mishaps were NASA sabotage.

    I just wasted too much time on this crap, sorry got better things to do. Suggest you go get an education or something.

  • There is a simple explanation for "no stars." We can see stars and light thanks to the atmosphere; in outer-space you there is no atmosphere so "no stars."

  • Incorrect. The atmosphere actually makes it harder to see stars. During the day light diffraction makes it almost impossible, and at night stars are less luminescent than they would be outside of the atmosphere. That's why the Hubble space telescope is in space. The reason for no visible stars near earth and moon is the brightness of these bodies reflecting sunlight (and requiring reduced camera aperture settings). That's why Hubble looks away from the Earth/Moon to see dim deep space.

  • Im done commenting on this video.. its been 2 weeks youve been luring me back here to defend myself.

    one day you will realize that man went to the moon, and yes money is the root of all errors...

    so, i wish you a merry xmas, and hope for the new year.

    you can please some of the people some of the time, buy you cannot please all of the people all of the time.

    god bless.

  • blah blah blah, grow up...

    say something with some substance besides "sterilize your children"....

    that has to be the WORST comeback EVER ...

    almost as pathetic as you spouting this crap about YT's ToS, and trailer this , and conspiracy that....

    grow up bro, and ppl might respect your comments more....

  • lol, no one else is using my account when im sitting right next to them "retard". sitting next to them means you are in their presence,..

    if you arent arguing with me about the moon landings , the wtf are you arguing about?

    all ive seen is a bunch of personal attacks and insults. Not once have you stated ANYTHING that is saying you do believe in the lunar landings... all you said is N.A.S.A is corrupt.. well nooo shit sherlock... look what happened when N.A.S.A silenced

    cont.

  • cont.

    the people in Mission Control who noticed the foam strike on Columbia.... They restructured N.A.S.A Project Management IMMEDIATELY,... that was 2004 , or do you not remember that in your hormone enraged, drug filled mind?

    Oh thats right.... They did, didnt they? ... lol

    grow up with your Terms Of Service crap kid... Do you HONESTLY think youtube would ban someone for letting their father make a comment or 2?

    once again, you are sadly mistaken.

  • youre about as intelligent as you are informed.

    nowhere does it say in youtubes terms of agreement, that you cant let your father type a comment or 2 in your presence..

    nice try.. are we getting mad that we have NO evidence to the contrary of man being on the moon?

    poor poor child, one day you will be able to afford a ticket to a space museum.

    maybe ill sell my "trailer" to help fund your trip/education... LMAO.

  • I'd hate to tell you that the "i worked @ morton-thiokol in Utah" remark was made by my 61 year old father who was here on vacation @ the time, and couldnt help but join in the fun of roasting someone who is so convinced that science is a lie. And hes not an engineer, hes a Retired Govt Contracting Sr. Bid Analyst. So , yes hes quite versed in Aerospace, and Communications Technologies.

    trailer.. lol , you sure you arent the one who is "poor, and uneducated"..? since misery loves company...

  • never bought a car or built a home huh?

  • nah, its called desires of the flesh, and i try to avoid them, you should try it out sometime.

  • RACIST as well as pedophile all in one, we sure picked a winner to roast here... LOL

    DO NOT bring that petty racist bullshit your spewin out the side of your neck around me kid, Unlike you i have experienced rites of brotherhood with MANY men of other race, creed, and color...

    you better be glad god is charitable, and hasnt smitten your ass down yet...

    im done with ya.. i dont deal with racists.

  • so full of hate and angst, pony up with your real age, cuz you act like a pissed off teenager on a friday night with no friends.

  • not even the law.. huh?

  • Lol? wtf, you must be in high-school still i take it?

  • Sick pedo... i hope they arrest you.

  • LOL? what the hell? ritalin works....

  • what was the argument again? i forget?

  • dont pull any more frakked up explanation

    pedo is fucking someone below 18.

    thats still child abuse.

  • exact same as your message pedo.

  • whats with the profanity?

    how would your profanity prove your theories?

  • Under-education + severe Napoleonic tendencies.

  • so a small typo and MFA's age shrinks by ten years?

    would my grandma be ever so happy about getting younger !!! lololol

  • yep, call the Waaahmbulance i pooped myself.

  • you cant even provide any-frakking-substantial proof for your frak-theories.

    it is sad, its you who's in the looking glass.

    go back to your mommy emo boy.

  • LOLOL

  • well i know something: you have been commented as child molesting pedo by some user named LiberalDemocrat83

    i dunnno what you "PULLED", but i dont think it is good..

    adios Anti-Science Conspiracy Theorist(ASCOT)

  • lmao sorry son, im not a democrat.

  • haha legion got FRAKKED!! ahahalolol.

    legion, YOU go back to highschool and stop watching vannessa anne in HSmusical on disney..

    lol

    why does disney pump more and more immoral, unlawful, dirty young women?

  • missed a pimple there, Mr.Conspiracy theorist...

    i bet you believe Bart Sibrels crap about the moon landings being staged....

    go back to school.

  • its Elude.....

    mr 18 year old grammar policeman

  • guess he has school in the morning.... good thing i dont.

  • I NEVER ONCE SAID NASA WAS FUNDED BY PRIVATE INVESTORS.... THEY GET THEIR MONEY FROM CONGRESS SON... DONT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH...

    I said the Experiments were privately funded....

    NASA just shoots the experiments into space... the private investors BUILD those experiments...

    nice way to show your age with insults too by the way...

    momma and daddy not hug you enough as a child?

  • I have personally worked for Morton-Thiokol Aerospace, in Utah, and helped build the solid rocket boosters for the space shuttle.

    so no.... i dont know shit about nasa..

    Oh, i also am an AVID Johnson Space Center visitor/committee member...

    worked for Harris RF corps that make the satellite comm links...

    Worked for Raytheon Developing S.O.P.H.I.A..

    no i dont know aerospace.

  • N thiokol?

    frak man, so you know what happened about the OV-99 complaint by one of your engineers? it was a real trouble time eh?

    o-rings and stuff.

  • Nah, luckily my dad started working at thiokol after 87, lol.

    Moved on to Kansas shortly after to work at Beechcraft, then on to New York to work @ Harris RF, then back to Texas to work @ Raytheon E-Systems. LOLOL.

  • Spell? i have no problem with spelling at all.. why dont you use your spell checker.

    immature no, standing up for NASA, and defending them against blatant teenage rebels without a clue... yes..

    GROW UP SON, and read a book... T.V. and P.C. dont teach you ANYTHING.

  • Little? lol go pop that pimple Mr. 18 year old raging hormone.....

    i have jeans older than you.

  • wow, for someone who supposedly makes so much more money than i do, and is evidently more educated.... you sound like a scorned teenager.... good luck with that attitude and logic...

    successful isnt living in mommys basement, or flipping burgers by the way.

    GO tattoo your anarchy symbols in your forehead, and reject research....

    NOT ALL OF NASA IS FUNDED BY THE CORRUPT AMERICAN GOVERNMENT... IDIOT..

    in fact nasa is a bus driver, for the major corps. experiments.... PEON

  • who is "they" and what is it "they " "pull"

    i didnt say i had faith in government, but i DID say i have faith in mankind...

    p.s. aliens killed Kennedy from the UT clocl tower, while the astronauts bombed the twin towers...

    go watch more conspiracy videos, so i can get my daily entertainment from peons like yourself.

  • MFA, this legion kid has not posted anything subsatantial eh?

    i've dealt with these little children before.

    so expect comments with th phrases:

    'i bet nasa gave you subsidies'

    'i bet you are government attack dog'

    ask them for proof, they go away : POOF!

  • this is true for some, but not all, that is why we have checks and balances....

  • Life is cool!

  • NASA is plagued AS a government AGENCY.

    not a private agency.

    so, NASA's projects are always influenced by government never ending change of mind, priority, funding and everything.

  • Not all of Nasas funding is done by congress... there are private investors.

    you have to remember, companies/universities build the experiments , and nasa is just the platform of transportation for those experiments to be deployed.

  • i agree that when it comes to today's NASA, but backin the 70's it was very different.

    you may be right that NASA have private help, like subcontractors, but a lot of the budget is composed of taxmoney, so the nosey-ness of presidents, politician etc.

    politcians still WANT the final say on a big project.

  • Very true, and honestly i wish there were better public involvement with space exploration policy, but no one cares about it, theyd rather drive their H3's and get a tan in a bed while watching MTV....

    sad but true.

  • theres RIDICULOUS amounts of evidence we've been there. not to mention the fact that theres little box up there we shoot a laser @ 250 times a year. Once again,the media wont show you that, because you as an individual DEMAND more blood and gore.

    (the box has a mirror on it, sending back the exact distance of the moon form the earth @ that point, it was our little insurance policy, in case someone came along and said. "NUH UH! you did'nt land on the moonzors" liek joo mudkipz /b/ watchers.)

  • im abit fussy that we got there anyway,its weird how it all got stopped.......if we got there then how come we didnt keep going.i would of thought just bieng a normal person we would of kept going cause thats how we are its nature (why would we stop ourselvs)there is loads of possabilties on the moon with silicone and then ice in the northen hemishere (dark side of the moon)to produce hydrogen as a rocket fuel with less gravity to earth or mars so take off and fuel wouldnt be a problem

  • Nixon lost to Kennedy in the 1960 election. The Moon program was started by Kennedy. Nixon was president when we finally reached the Moon. He cancelled the last 3 scheduled missions. Maybe he wanted his own program, like the War on Cancer.

    Much of the public had lost interest anyway. They only get interested, for a little while, when there is something new, such as Skylab, the Shuttle, a Mars rover, a new Moon mission.

  • The "Salvage One" concept. How cool- takes me back to my childhood! Making space travel pay was always the key. Would love to believe it's possible...

  • yeah, watch them find structures on the moon when they go back. Structures thats not ours.

  • I think that sort of thing is the Holy Grail of anybody's space programme, public or private... evidence of life elsewhere... although I think there are better candidates than the Moon.

  • Hey, it mean NASA don't have the technic to land on the moon?

  • NASA doesn't have any funding to land on the moon at the current time.

  • not in the next 10 years. when ares-orion flies.

  • I really would like less politics involved in NASA, it'd be so much more productive. There are so many people who would love to go on a one way mission to Mars or the Moon (pick me! pick me!). I'd love the government to not act so forcefully in what happens to NASA's budget and let it have a little "give" or stretch to it.

  • suicide mission? sorry we dont allow suicidal people in multi million dollar space craft and spend millions on their training, just for them to have a "change of heart" and waste our time and money.

    i envy your spirit, but robotics is safer/cheaper.

  • Who lied to you?

  • very cool

  • Cool. Can I enter? I built a rocket that flies to 4,000 feet and mach 1... Boy. Now that I think about it that seems puny.

  • i wonder how Zimbawee and Haiti will do.hahah

  • Space race is back , and now I can be proud to be romanian , ARCA the romanian team will launch a rocket in 1 month , and it has the best chances of all to succed , I hope the european space agnecy will give romanian space agnecy more money , because romania has just recovert from comunism. If it won't be us , I hope another european team , spain , england or germany will win this , I really want to see those americans get beaten, they've become a bit to confident in their nasa.

  • Wow. This video made me cry. It is such an amazing vision. Just to see what could be possible.

  • I love this project already. The X-Prize is ingenious.

  • Screw the stupid Moon. It's nothing but a dead rock. I demand Mars! Mars is the Human race's best hope.

  • We need to go back to the Moon first - besides it has resources, and is close to us. We'll always need to utilize the Moon in the way we'll always need both robotic and human spaceflight; utilization of lunar resources and a lunar outpost, and Martian exploration and colonization will complement each other.

  • The U.S. government will love the idea of private citizens shooting guided rockets into the sky.

  • LOL. Most teams will probably contract companies like SpaceX to launch their spacecraft, and they know what they're doing and are fully licensed by the FAA.

  • We haven't returned to the moon in 40 years. Japan has. China has. Who's next? Google? Why not! Nasa may touch down there in 10 years. We'll get to Mars, but master the moon first.

    Earth is more important. King George Bush II killed climate satellites we need, (along with minor things like Liberty, Justice, Freedom and the American Way). Restore Earth science to Nasa!

    The moon is a harsh mistress, but we will go because we can, because we must. One small step deserves another.

  • The launch is easily within reach, all you need is a sponsor. SpaceX's trans-lunar injection missions cost around $47 million dollars. You put a spacecraft on top, equipped with a lander and a rover. Hard? Yes. Expensive? Perhaps. Impossible? Definitely not.

  • THIS world right here gives all of us more than enough opportunities to learn how to live in harmony with creation.

    Those who claim our hope lies in the moon are just looking for yet another (rather transparent) excuse to destroy even more formerly untouched environments.

    Silicone on the moon? -lol.

    The plain sand in our deserts provides us with more raw material than we could transform into solar cells in centuries.

    Who has no respect for creation HERE, won´t have it out in space, either.

  • Listen, The human race is dust if we dont get off this rock now. We are finally at the point where it is feasible to form offworld colonies. If there is a plague or nuclear exchange or comet collision in the next 50 years, we may never recover. Erecting offworld colonies is an insurance policy against extinction. And if that means we have to disturb a few lunar dunes, then by God lets do it.

  • I want to be there when it happens.

  • You will be, don't worry.