I'm sorry to state the obvious that you are deliberately driving this discussion towards max word count and min meaning.
I have a statement - you can not do what you say you want to do. And as you say yourself - be my guest and prove me wrong by providing as much evidence about your abilities, prior work and determination, as you have at hand. I am a mere spectator of your efforts to change my opinion.
QuoteI watched the Top Gear team's fantastic failure of trying to put a reliant robin into space. I knew that was rather far fetched, but had the release mechanisms worked it might have actually made it.That has got to be the most ridiculous statement I've read all week.
I watched the Top Gear team's fantastic failure of trying to put a reliant robin into space. I knew that was rather far fetched, but had the release mechanisms worked it might have actually made it.
StarkRG - what age bracket would you put yourself in? I only ask as I think it would perhaps put your comments into context.
Like I said, it's not negative, it's realistic. The average private citizen simply lacks the funding, equipment, and quite frankly intelligence to put a device on the moon or even into orbit!
I would love to build one of those DIY laser cutting devices, but I know I just don't have the cash or time for it, so I'm not bothering to ask for help.
By all means, continue this thread, but I'm just trying to put a realistic spin on the conversation, rather than what sounds like a young teenagers unreasonable desires.
Ok, I interpereted the motivation as "Ignore the practicalities of getting there, I want to design a lunar vehicle. What are some of the detailed design considerations, such as radiation, that I'll need to consider?"I think that's a valid and interesting topic. NASA isn't one guy who designed the rockets, trained the astronauts, built the lunar rovers, it was teams doing individual elements.
NASA's already done most of the difficult work, I'm not starting from scratch here.
If you don't know what's required to do it how do you know you can't?
"realistic" responses are just negative responses in disguise since you aren't giving any explanation what, exactly is stopping me from being able to do it.
So - is this all just some kind of "thought experiment", with some notes that come out at the end to be filed away for later for when it seems that launch prices are coming waaaaay down? Beyond that, I don't see much practical need.
If you were designing something for harsh earth-bound environments, then I could at least see the possibilities. For space-bound (and lunar-bound) devices, even if you managed to gather all of the information, then design and built a device, it would still be a moot point because it is unlikely that, within your lifetime or your children's lifetime, that the political will and technology will be there to enable ordinary people to put stuff into orbit or send it to the moon.
The energy costs alone are that huge.
You should know this. Unless there is some breakthrough in energy research (sustainable fusion?), space is simply out of reach for all but large multinational corporations, and governments - and so far, only government entities have managed to put men in orbit, on the moon, and send devices to other planets, orbit the sun, and out of the solar system.
The population gets real butt-achey about anything with the word "nuclear" in it, because they are ignorant and selfish, mainly.
Just don't expect this to happen in the next 50 years - or even a hundred.
why ask here?
You also need to think about dust and such (once on the moon); sealed systems, positive pressurization, etc - can help with that (but eventually, it will fail).
As others have noted, you can learn a lot just by trying to design something to deal with harsh earth-bound issues (for instance, I am constantly amazed at the design and evolution of the iRobot Roomba - the floor is a very harsh environment for a vacumming robot!). If you can get something to survive a month in your backyard without fixes or updates, your next step would be to stick it in the Black Rock desert for a year; if it can survive there, it can probably survive on the moon!
why you expect forum members to predict the Arduino performance outside the bounds for which it is designed is puzzling.
I know you're going to metaphorically kill me for saying this but: MONEY!
i dont think your even going to get this off the floor for less than £150k
how the fluffy duck are you going to build a rocket that A, is big enough to carry the fuel to get there. B, have the accuracy to hit the moon from 200,000 miles away and C, land on the moon without killing the robot
personally i would start with a blinking LED
nasa with a unlimited budget struggle to get things into mars and work
nasa have a team of 40 people to guide the rockets where they are meant to go - do you?
I figured, because of its content, this would be a forum where everyone would have an exploratory attitude. I guess I figured wrong. I guess this is why there's so much animosity towards Arduinos. Most users aren't interested in doing more than blinking lights.