Pretty much put the nail in the coffin of the moonscope issue. Although many here have pointed out obvious common sense reasons to doubt the practicality and cost effectiveness of this option the reference you provided has a lot of technical detail by a real expert in the field.
Mazanek is an engineer who is most certainly more qualified in the area of asteroid deflection, but I'm sure this expert is more qualified to judge the relative merits of types of space telescopes. I have yet to see a reference by the way that indicates Mazanek is dedicated to the moonscope option as the only CAPS info I've seen lists both lunar and orbital options for detection.
I was very surprised to learn from your post that one of my reasons for returning to the Moon was also gone. I thought a lunar radiotelescope on the far side was still a good idea. Apparantly not any more.
Regards,
Mark
Space/Science » in reply to On Lunar Surface Telescopes: Dr. Daniel Lester testimony to Subcommittee on Space...
Great Reference Chris
The whole thread (24 posts)
- On Lunar Surface Telescopes: Dr. Daniel Lester testimony to Subcommittee on Space...
- I can only see disadvantages to a moon based observatory
- Goodbye Uncle Eddie
- Low Earth Orbit is easier, cheaper, and better. (n/t)
- Costs vs Risk Reduction Table From NASA's NEO Office
- Great Reference Chris
- And you have the power and authority to prevent lunar telescopes [optical or radio] from coming to pass, Chris? (n/t)
- So yesterday's news...
- Bets anyone?
- re: On Lunar Surface Telescopes: Dr. Daniel Lester testimony to Subcommittee on Space...
- re: On Lunar Surface Telescopes: Dr. Daniel Lester testimony to Subcommittee on Space...
- Arthur C. Clarke knew that in 1960...