{"id":45695,"date":"2012-05-28T11:19:59","date_gmt":"2012-05-28T11:19:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/uncategorized\/nasa-asks-future-explorers-to-respect-historic-landing-sites.php"},"modified":"2012-05-28T11:19:59","modified_gmt":"2012-05-28T11:19:59","slug":"nasa-asks-future-explorers-to-respect-historic-landing-sites","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/nasa\/nasa-asks-future-explorers-to-respect-historic-landing-sites.php","title":{"rendered":"NASA asks future explorers to respect historic landing sites"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    When the last American astronauts blasted off from the Moon in    1972, it seemed as if they were leaving behind monuments that    would stand for all time. On a lifeless, airless satellite    there would never be any scavengers or souvenir hunters, no    wind to bury or wear down the abandoned spacecraft and    artifacts, and no air to corrode metal. Even the footprints would still be there millions of    years from now. Or so everyone thought. Now, with more and more    nations and private organizations planning manned and unmanned    missions to the Moon, NASA is worried that the Apollo landing    sites and others could be endangered by the next wave of lunar    explorers. To prevent this, the space agency issued a set of    guidelines that politely asks everybody to keep their distance.  <\/p>\n<p>    NASA left a lot of hardware on the Moon during its first phase    of lunar exploration. In addition to the six Apollo landing    sites there are the remains of five Ranger probes that were    deliberately crashed into the Moon, seven Surveyor soft    landers, five S-IVB Apollo third-stage boosters that were used    for seismic studies and six Lunar Module Ascent Stages that    were crashed at the end of their missions, as was the complete    Lunar Module from Apollo 10 and an assortment of orbiter probes    that ended up impacting the surface.  <\/p>\n<p>    That is a lot of hardware and its also a lot of history. NASA    is worried that without some guidance and agreement    irreplaceable relics of the Space Age, such as Neil Armstrongs    first footprint on the Moon could be lost and sites needlessly    disturbed. More than that, many of these sites are still of    great scientific interest with experiments still going on after    more than forty years. The Apollo landing sites, for example    contain laser reflectors for accurately measuring the distance    between the Earth and the Moon. Also, the spacecraft and    equipment left behind are a valuable experiment in the effects    of prolonged exposure to the lunar environment. Though theres    no air on the Moon, there are extremes of temperature in the    hundreds of degrees, micrometeorites, cosmic radiation and    intense ultraviolet light. The last is particularly    destructive. If some future astronaut does visit an Apollo    sight, he might think that someone has run off with the nylon    American flag or the gold plastic foil that wrapped the Descent    Stage. In fact, the UV rays from the Sun destroyed both years    ago.  <\/p>\n<p>      Apollo 11's Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment is still operating      today (Image: NASA)    <\/p>\n<p>    With both history and science at stake, NASA feels that it    cannot ignore the possible threat posed by Moon new programs,    no matter how well intentioned they are. The space agency    therefore recently took the opportunity to announce that the    Google Lunar X Prize committee is agreeing to abide by    guidelines issued by NASA in 2011. These guidelines, which    cover Apollo landing sites, impact areas, unmanned probes,    experiments and footprints and rover tracks, are intended to    protect historic sites, prevent interference with experiments    and to ensure that American property rights are respected,    since all the vehicles and gear still belong to the U.S.    government.  <\/p>\n<p>    Effectively, the guidelines boil down to steering clear of U.S.    lunar sites whenever possible. Future landings are asked to    remain two kilometers from historic sites (especially those of    Apollo 11, the first manned landing site, and Apollo 17, the    last Apollo manned landing site). They are also asked to remain    half a kilometer away from impact sites. This exclusion zone    doesnt just include landings, but also any flyover paths that    a landing spacecraft might take.  <\/p>\n<p>    The reason for this is dust. One advantage of being on the Moon    is that there isnt any air to suspend dust particles.    Unfortunately, that also means that theres no air to slow down    even the tiniest particle. An impacting object or the blast    from a landing rocket can kick up huge quantities of dust and    hurl them with such velocity that they can go into orbit around    the Moon or even escape entirely. This was shown during the    Apollo 12 mission when the astronauts examined the Surveyor 3    lander, which NASA had sent a couple of years earlier to scout    out landing sites. Despite being far off, the Lunar Module    Intrepid created such a storm of dust that the Surveyor    suffered a miniature artillery barrage.  <\/p>\n<p>    For similar reasons, rover operators are requested to keep    speeds down in the vicinity of sites to prevent kicking up    dust. Though rovers are requested to steer clear entirely from    the Apollo 11 and 17 sites, they will be allowed within one to    three meters of spacecraft and objects at the Apollo 12, 14 and    16 sites so long as they stay away from active experiments or    places where soil samples were taken. The one thing NASA is    emphatic about ensuring that any rovers in the area to move    well away from the sites by the end of their missions. The last    thing NASA wants is for a rover to die on site and start    venting battery gases that contaminate the area.  <\/p>\n<p>    The important thing to remember about NASAs guidelines is that    they are exactly that - guidelines. The U.S. space agency has    no power to enforce its rules on other organizations. Though    there is a UN Outer Space Treaty to control how space explorers    behave, not every nation is a signatory and the treaty is    something of a Cold War statement of piety barring spacefaring    nations from doing what they couldnt do anyway, such as    claiming whole planets. More to the point, the treaty may not    apply to private organizations. Worse, it may not stand up to    challenges based on precedents of salvage or maritime law. In    other words, over half a century after Sputnik, space law is    still a bit of a muddle.  <\/p>\n<p>    Because of these legal question marks, NASA is taking the    softly, softly route of issuing guidelines and requesting    politely that everyone else respects them. It would clearly be    a great pity if these guidelines aren't followed, but only time    will tell whether the site of humanitys first visit to another    world remains untouched.  <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>See the article here:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.gizmag.com\/nasa-historic-lunar-site-guidelines\/22698\/\" title=\"NASA asks future explorers to respect historic landing sites\">NASA asks future explorers to respect historic landing sites<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> When the last American astronauts blasted off from the Moon in 1972, it seemed as if they were leaving behind monuments that would stand for all time.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/nasa\/nasa-asks-future-explorers-to-respect-historic-landing-sites.php\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"limit_modified_date":"","last_modified_date":"","_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-45695","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-nasa"],"modified_by":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/45695"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=45695"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/45695\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=45695"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=45695"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=45695"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}