According to our Apollo huggers, and of that classification must certainly include our fearless WMD warlord(GW Bush), the environment upon our moon offers us some sort of a walk in the park, though sort of like the park that's surrounding Chernobyl (11 mSv per year or merely a TBI dosage of 3 mr/day), however just a wee bit worse off (aka lethal) if you'd care to honestly include a few cosmic rays, plus an unobstructed dosage of a healthy solar influx, all and all of what's creating absolute loads of secondary hard-X-rays running amuck, plus there's always a little of whatever a few micro-meteorites have to introduce per m2/day.

I haven't worked out exactly how much density it'll take for cutting those nasty hard-X-rays down to a long-term survivable level, though for certain there's no Apollo moon suit that's going to suffice beyond a few hours, especially against any micro-meteorite and of especially of whatever the least bit greater than micro there's absolutely no contest whatsoever (a speck of sand represents moon-1/moonsuit-0, as in summarily DOA).

I believe the only semi-safe time that our moon offers as any sort of "walk in the park" is via earthshine, and only then when our sun is being somewhat dormant, of which the dormant part happens for a few hours out of certain years. Though even then the raw lunar nighttime surface environment that's entirely surrounding your naked moonsuit butt is most likely capable of contributing 1 rad/hr (24 rads/day), much of which can still involve cosmic influx that's reacting rather badly with the surrounding lunar substances, of thereby creating a few of those nasty hard-X-rays, of which even this relatively minor level of radiation dosage that's cut by perhaps as much as 1.1:1 (10% reduction) by the slim density worth of the moonsuit isn't what's going to be nailing your sorry hide to the lunar barn.

Of what the moon otherwise offers is a wealth of prosperity, of vital Earth sciences and of extremely good astronomy potential, especially via the VLA-SAR sorts of imaging technology, along with accessing numerous minerals including a bonus of obtaining He3, all of which can be efficiently exported to Earth via the LSE-CM/ISS. Although, in order to safely utilize that prosperity on behalf of Earth's humanity, for that task we'll need to at least be aware of the truthful consequences of having to survive on the moon, as even robotically isn't any "walk in the park" like so many pro-Apollo folks would have you believe.

Without an atmospheric buffer zone, nor Van Allen expanse other than a wee bit taken from Earth as distorted towards our moon and thus slightly including LL-1, our somewhat salty moon offers life as we know it a damn slim chance, much like the reverse of what a submarine offers for folks here on Earth that desire living while under water, although our lunar environment seems somewhat if not a whole lot much worse off than of what's external to any submarine because;

1) first of all there's absolutely no buoyancy to being had, so that you could absolutely reverse-drown yourself (aka vacuum freeze-dry and/or summarily roasted) in such an environment.

2) there's actually a fairly terrific vacuum that's highly uncondusive to life as we know it, though extremely useful on behalf of a good number of processes.

3) there's a great deal of unobstructed primary solar influx, plus the reaction of all that raw energy creating secondary/recoil (hard x-ray) TBI worthy issues.

4) since there's no atmosphere, there's absolutely nothing slowing anything down.

5) those micro-meteorites are just about everywhere, as incoming at 5+km/s to some being 30+ km/s, along with a few comet induced at 72+km/s.

6) since there's no atmosphere, micro and fully meteorite class projectiles are downright mean and nasty, as deposited along with shards strewn about the dark lunar surface clearly indicate.

7) while in daylight, the thermal influx from the full solar spectrum is contributing 1400 w/m2, plus whatever's reflecting back off the dark surface isn't making it any better.

8) while within earthshine, your direct radiation becomes more cosmic while experiencing somewhat less solar, though still expect as much as 10% to as little as 1% of the illuminated irradiation levels to impose limitations upon anyone insufficiently shielded.

9) sufficient shielding that might be considered adequate for a fully solar illuminated EVA, is more so of what's beneficial for the structural attributes of fending off micro-meteorites than for radiation.

10) lunar basalt, processed into composite fibers and subsequently into a structural matrix will enable shelters and of the mobility issues to be constructed on site, as well as for creating the LSE-CM/ISS and of it's tethers.

When I speak of TBI dosage, I'm first of all starting off with the nearly omni-directional influx of what's solar induced, plus cosmic, plus loads of secondary issues that are coming at you from nearly all directions, and not of some dosage meter taking it's directional readings.

When I speak of having sufficient shielding, that's now referring to the need for surviving micro and not so micro meteorites, rather than as for just fending off the primary and secondary influx of solar and lunar environment radiation, along with that shield density being sufficient as to reduce it's own generated gontlet of secondary (hard x-ray) dosage, where again that being a full body (TBI) assalt defensive plan that's otherwise least forgiving on the biological DNA/RNA long run, as being in addition to certain death by way of meteorite without proper notice.

In other words, you can't possibly have too much structural shield density if you're planning on an extended stay, at least if without dependence upon your banked bone marrow and otherwise accepting a few creative body piercings as par for the course.

Unlike in the lab, or for the vast majority of radiation exposed industry workers, the lunar environment isn't coming at you from one specific quadrant, nor from one specific side, top or bottom, as on the moon your entire body has the warm and fuzzy benefit of receiving a not so healthy dosage from nearly all angles, especially of those secondary hard x-ray variety. Even though the bulk of lunar sunshine that's of your primary concern whenever the going gets tough is somewhat of a nasty directional influx, of what that sunlight and fully unobstructed spectrum of solar flux reflects off and/or reacts badly with, of what subsequently amounts to creating those secondary hard x-rays, is every bit as important to being shielded from. The solar wind of essentially super-charged submicron particles can be understood, and forewarned of such an impending solar weather induced event, which may last a few minutes to hours worth, with a few exceptions of the worst storms lasting all day, at charged levels of lethal radiation that have often been beyond our scales of recording such, thus well beyond our DNA/RNA surviving.

As I've stipulated, I believe on those relatively passive solar days, the lunar surface environment might settle itself into a medium of 3.64 Sv/hr, though occasionally passivated down to 3.64 Sv/day, and rarely if ever being below 1 Sv (100 rads) for that of an entire day. No matters, as even if the raw dosage is of the 364 rads/hr variety, it'll be those micro and not so micro meteorites that'll be getting your attention.

Meteorite SOA (speed of advance) is all in the wrist action, thus impact is nearly always impressive, and lunar gravity makes for a terrific curve ball.

In other words of lunar meteorite wisdom;  Because the moon offers no Van Allen expanse, nor measurable degree of atmosphere, it's not only what you see being exactly what you'll get, and then some, but it's of the added enhancement of 1.6 m/s SOA placed on top of whatever velocity the original SOA was about to contribute towards modifying the mostly dark basalt lunar landscape, and of whatever is situated in between is just too darn bad. In this instance, survival of the fittest means having yourself a good deal of structural integrity situated between yorself and it, as within a LM-1 bus of rather substantial basalt composite of rather considerable density that's surrounding your butt for the vast majority of the time, and for otherwise drawing straws should there be an actual need of some foolish moon-suit EVA.

Moon-suit EVAs via earthshine are certainly going to become the preferred alternative in an external environment of something typically less than 9 Sv/day, though seldom if ever achieving less than 0.1 Sv/day. However, sunshine or not, of micro and of those not so micro meteorites don't mind working the swing shift. In fact, because you should be on the receiving end of your lunar landscape being in a somewhat worse off relationship to whatever is inbound towards our sun, and/or being additionally influenced against your best wishes by Earth, whereas chances are the closing SOA as well as for the lunar gravity influence is only adding further insult to probable injury.

From a purely lunar perspective, mother Earth partially blocks what's solar inbound at best 5% of the time, and otherwise blocks what's in the mutual orbital pathway durring another 5% of the time, thus possibly 3 days worth out of every lunar cycle is there any beneficial debris clearing by way of mother Earth taking the brunt of those into her atmosphere, where the vast majority of such debris is converted into energy rather than making it all the way to the surface, though some of those are merely diverted and a few manage to vier their way through Earth's upper atmosphere to being all that more so destined for the moon. So, all and all, there's some good and some bad news which applies.

What I'm trying to clarify is, that for the task of humans surviving on the moon, we'll need darn good shelter and of surface transport technology that's certainly constructed much better off than any brick shithouse. To that endeavor of obtaining good shelter is already within the realm of what the moon has to offer, that being basalt and of all the necessary energy for processing that natural substance into terrific fibers, that which a little imported epoxy/glue can be made into almost anything, including a 50 tonne metro bus that's powered along by the IRRC engine that's efficiently fueled by the likes of imported h2o2/c12h26.

Obviously a lunar command post infrastructure that's situated 3+ meters below the surface will suffice, although that's having to live in a hole for the majority of your stay, which is hardly conducive to the productivity issues of further exploring, mining and subsequently extracting He3 for export to Earth (where recently all the lights have been going out because of whatever energy we haven't used up we've either blown up or lost control of to some WMD donkey-cart equipped warlord, such as another sand pirate like Saddam).

Obviously within my lunar survival plan, I'm excluding upon any sort of 10+ kg projectile that clocking in at 10+km/s, much less 30+km/s, as for such a horrific impact, being 3+ meters under isn't even offering a sure bet. Just from our own space junk that's imposing way more than 100 kg worth of doing a serious number upon whatever is lunar based, as at a mere 5 km/s is where this amount could penatrate or at least fracture 3+ meters worth of lunar basalt, and then some.

Just say, that because I don't know any better, for a little practice lets assume that a full moon-suit entails 4 m2 worth of a surround material. Instead of applying the 0.5 g/cm2 of those Apollo missions, instead we manage to utilize a composite of creating 2 g/cm2 that's nearly equivalent to 0.29" of solid aluminum, though so much impact resilient/tougher (energy absorbing) by at least 10 fold.

Moon Suit Density Total; 4 * 100 * 100 * 2 = 80 kg

Plus equipment & outfitting of another 220 kg and we've got 300 kg.

Taking the 1/6th lunar gravity into account and, lo and behold, the 300 kg becomes worth 50 kg in extra astronaut payload, plus stiffer than hell. Though because this astronaut was 100 kg on earth having become just 16.7 kg while on the moon, thereby the net result is actually a negative factor, of weighing all of 66.7 kg while fully in moon-suit as opposed to the norm of being 100 kg while on Earth, which is obviously a net reduction of 33.3 kg that his or her legs must carry about (in other words; walking on air).

In a few other words, it seems the fully outfitted moon-suit could actually represent as much as 83.3 kg in terms of added lunar mass. If the occupant was an accomplished 100 kg soul while strutting about on Earth, as then there'd be an equal but rather higher center of gravity moon-suited individual that's managing somewhat identical to just walking about here on Earth. It seems we could push that fully outfitted moon suit to a lunar total mass of 100 kg without exceeding human endurance, as that amount would be like hiking about Earth with a 37 pound backpack, of which we seem to do that much without serious complications.

That's why I foresee no insurmountable aspects of obtaining the 2 g/cm2 as opposed to the 0.5 g/cm2 of those Apollo suits. After all, if you're not leaving the moon for months to come, and possibly even staying years well demand a survivable EVA solution, plus whatever future EVAs well have to be far better protected and perhaps endure a greater number of hours per mission, though hopefully not of venturing yourself more than a few meters away from the preferred shelter of the LM-1 bus, that is if you knew enough of what was good for you.

Having the LM-1 outfitted with a number of fast scan radars sweeping the 360º horizon, and of all the 180º dome of meteorite penetrable nothingness that the moon has been known for, this aspect could prove being a somewhat energy consuming task, especially if that's having to trace upon whatever's trekking your way as becoming 10+km/s, and of all things you expected a 15 second warning and/or instruction of at least which way to duck, as that's obviously in need of a 160 km (100 mile) radar event horizon/range requirement of scanning for absolutely everything in sight (except for your moon boots), and per second if at all possible. Remind yourself that the likes of x-band radar isn't going to cut it, as micrometeorites of less than 1 mm are simply too freaking small, thereby at least Ka band (38 Ghz), and even 150 Ghz radar may prove insufficient for this task.

Thereby, I'm thinking of incorporating a fast scanning laser cannon (FSLC) as a backup plan of some viable spectrum that'll ideally disrupt the incoming micro flak before it has a chance at doing harm, as otherwise it's going to be a bloody free-for-all turkey shoot upon whomever drew the short straw and had to perform the EVA. One notion of improving micro meteorite detection is somewhat like implementing a giant smoke detector, whereas a scanning laser beam could essentially illuminate whatever is within a specified range, then the following array of photon detectors would triangulate upon detecting and tracing those as fast moving dust particles. This particle illumination method might only offer a few seconds worth of trajectory notice, though a few seconds is certainly better off than having nothing. Considering the lack of atmosphere, and thereby zero pollution, the particle illumination via laser could prove more energy efficient as well as more reliable than traditional 300 Ghz radar.

To suggest otherwise is simply not a wise nor prudent move, as any given astronaut exposure represents at least 2 m2 worth of wide open target that of any given micro-meteorite that has your name on it isn't going to discriminate yourself from the gravity pull of the moon. Thereby I'm thinking kevlar and basalt composites being the suit construction of choice, as offering the most effective composite shield/kg for the greatest degree of impact resistance per kg as well as per cm2. As otherwise for staying within the LM-1 as your basalt composite 30+g/cm2 metro lunar bus well offer the only reasonably safe home away from home that'll take those hits and allow you to keep on ticking like that TIMEX watch. In fact, I'd plan on the forward crew cab portion being <60 g/cm2 (that's 25 cm worth even if <10 of those cm were of basalt microsphere).

Perhaps we'll need to further reflect upon the subjects of what's just not right about our present day position with respect to certain long-term accomplishments and future goals.

Other reading material that's more right than not about our orchestrated policies that have clearly placed us where we're at today, which is not to say there's any number of syntax errors and/or unintentional misconceptions so that one could honestly argue a few points, though of such discrepancies do NOT automatically erase the truth and/or the consequence portions of what's correct. If one insist upon discrediting all that's correct by pouncing over a mistake or two, then by all means you must entirely discredit the likes of Einstein, and surely upon the rightful beholder of such a pathetic WMD "so what's the difference" policy that resulted in undeniably truthful amounts of premeditated carnage, and otherwise upon his educational "high standards and accountability" phony baloney that's simply way over the line of just making a few mistakes. The fact that our warlord administration had carefully crafted plans for the overthrow and pillaging of Iraq from day one is sort of adding insult to our injuries, of which I'm not all that certain we can afford to sustain this level of superiority via arrogance and greed, as unlike the Pope/Cathar fiasco, God may not be on our side.