Project Orion to Bring U.S. Back to the Moon

ganjadude writes "Thirty-seven years ago yesterday, Project Apollo put the first humans on the surface of the Moon. The next time the U.S. launches its astronauts to Earth's natural satellite, they will do so as part of Project Orion." From the article: "Under Project Orion, NASA would launch crews of four astronauts aboard Orion capsules, first to Earth orbit and the International Space Station and then later to the Moon. Two teams, one led by Lockheed Martin and the other a joint effort by Northrop Grumman and The Boeing Co., are currently competing to build the CEV. NASA is expected to select the winner in September."

Comments

Am I the only one...

[TintinX]

I read that as Project Onion.
Either way - something to cry over, I'm sure

Re:Am I the only one...

[megaditto]

Not to worry, with our current technology the entire thing can be faked in CGI for half the cost of the original Apollo sound-staging.

--
I keed, I keed!

Hammer, Feather, Freefall on the Moon: Revisited

[Anonymous Coward]

"Fall heavy towards the moon, and the moon falls also towards you." -- Nietzsche

Hammer and feather are dropped simultaneously from equal heights (as measured by distance from the center of the moon), separated laterally by a distance substantially less than the moon's diameter. Both hammer and feather experience force from the moon's gravity proportional to their mass, and hence both accelerate at the same rate. Meanwhile, the moon is also accelerating towards the other two objects, but unevenly so: the hammer exerts a greater gravitational pull due to its greater mass. The moon is therefore subject to a torque, causing it to accelerate more rapidly towards the hammer.

The hammer is first to hit the ground.

Anyone who denies this truth is a spatially absolutist lunocentric whose refusal to recognize the validity of hammer mechanics/experience places him wholly beyond the help of Galilean metaphysics. Such hammer (feather) rejectionists ought to be banished to the stars, for their own good and for the good of not only hammers and feathers but all subjugated smaller objects, everywhere, who find themselves victims of this scientifically perpetrated emassculation.

--
a756f345ec354225c08ff1a10a43162a

Re:Thanks for getting my hopes up, NASA

[RsG]

Alternatively, we could revise the name of the original nuclear pulse propulsion version of Project Orion. I vote for "Project KABOOM" :-P

Re:Why not build more Saturn Vs?

[CreateWindowEx]

I was about to reply that I had heard they had lost the plans to the Saturn V, then thought to myself that perhaps that was an urban legend, and of course, it is just a legend at least according to this page.

Key takeaway (at least according to some random internet source, ha ha):

Despite a widespread belief to the contrary, the Saturn V blueprints have not been lost. They are kept at Marshall Space Flight Center on microfilm.

The problem in re-creating the Saturn V is not finding the drawings, it is finding vendors who can supply mid-1960's vintage hardware (like guidance system components), and the fact that the launch pads and VAB have been converted to Space Shuttle use, so you have no place to launch from.

By the time you redesign to accommodate available hardware and re-modify the launch pads, you may as well have started from scratch with a clean sheet design.

Not to mention the cost of updating the design to include child seat brackets, non-CFC air conditioning, and an MP3 player input...

Re:Ares V

[Guppy06]

"Can we only put ~70 mT on the Moon or can we put more?"

Um... 70 militeslas?

If you're trying to say "metric tons," you might be better off with "mton," "tonne," or the far less ambiguous "Mg."

Re:inherent scientific value?

[cunina]

If Tang had been developed by NASA, it would serve as a powerful argument against space exploration.

Re:How about just the Economy of it?

[Jeremi]

You would be hard pressed to refine enough Al on ISS to make a teaspoon.

Which is, of course, why England does not have a space programme.

really

[quantic_oscillation7]

hummm.... maybe this time they really go there!!!

Re:inherent scientific value?

[RsG]

And the remainder are driven by sex and/or masturbation.

That's not true! What about the internet...

Ok, bad example :-)