Slashdot Mirror


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."

6 of 399 comments (clear)

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. The last lunar landing was Apollo 17... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 4, Informative

    Apollo 18 was killed by budget cuts shortly after 19 and 20 were. :(

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  3. Re:Thanks for getting my hopes up, NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    No kidding. Naming in Orion is travsity. The real Orion would open up the entire solar system. This return to Apollo style capsules is an embarassment, a belated acknowledgement that we went down the wrong path and now must back up and start again. Nothing at all like the great leap forward that a nuclear pulse rocket would be.

    Not really. In order to use a nuclear pulse rocket (or any realistically sized method of nuclear propulsion) you need a heavy lift rocket. Currently there is no heavy lift rocket that could realistically put a nuclear pulse rocket into LEO (and a nuclear pulse rocket would have to be in a very high earth orbit or in interplanetary space before any politician would allow it to be activated). Rebuilding our heavy lift capability with the CaLV or Ares V is essential.

    Second, we need a cheap way to put humans into space. The CLV or Ares I will do that.

    The only part that you should consider a waste would be building the lander (and perhaps the CLV if you are one of those machine-only supporters). The Ares architecture will be extremely useful for future technologies. Even large rockets like the Delta IV or the Arianne V are kids toys compared to real heavy lift rockets like the Saturn V and the Ares V. Having a 100 ton class rocket makes a lot of projects possible, not just Project Orion.
  4. Re:Project Orion? by ucblockhead · · Score: 4, Informative

    Project Orion didn't use nukes to "lift" the ship. It was an interstellar craft that would have used nukes for propulsion once well away from Earth.

    Using nukes to "lift" anything would be utterly insane.

    --
    The cake is a pie
  5. Re:inherent scientific value? by Schemat1c · · Score: 4, Informative

    I question that we would necessarily have developed velcro...

    Once again, Velcro was not developed by NASA.

    From Wikipedia:

    "The hook and loop fastener was invented in 1948 by Georges de Mestral, a Swiss engineer. The idea came to him after he took a close look at the Burdock seeds which kept sticking to his clothes and his dog's fur on their daily walk in the Alps. De Mestral named his invention "VELCRO" after the French words velours, meaning 'velvet', and crochet, meaning 'hook'. Today Beige-a is the leading exporter of velcro in the world."

    --

    "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
  6. Re:inherent scientific value? by Seraphim1982 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I question that we would necessarily have developed velcro, microcomputers, Tang, new alloys, biomedical advances, etc., by sending robotic ships to explore space.

    Tang and Velcro were devolped independently of the US space program. Velcro was invented in Europe in 1948. Tang was devolped as a breakfast drink in the 50's about 10 years before its association with the space program.

    What's more, it's the manned space flights that hold the public's interest and keep the funding up.

    Then why were the later Apollo missions abandoned due to lack of public interest?
    Holding the public's interest is impossible, the public is far to fickle.