Slashdot Mirror


NASA Is Studying A Manned Trip Around The Moon On A $23 Billion Rocket (buzzfeed.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report on NASA's ongoing work on a manned trip to the moon. From the report: Without a new administrator even nominated yet, NASA's acting head Robert Lightfoot on Wednesday requested a study of whether next year's first flight of the Space Launch System rocket, billed as the most powerful NASA has built, could have a crew of astronauts. "I know the challenges associated with such a proposition," Lightfoot said in a letter to his agency, citing costs, extra work, and "a different launch date" for the planned 2018 Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1). The mission would be launched by the massive SLS, which is still in development, then boosted by a European service module to put three astronauts inside the new Orion space capsule on a three-week trip around the moon. NASA first sent three astronauts around the moon in 1968 in the Apollo 8 mission. The last astronaut to stand on the moon, the late Gene Cernan returned to Earth in 1972. The new talk of a repeat moon-circling mission, aboard an untested spacecraft, has space policy experts variously thrilled, dismissive, and puzzled. "I frankly don't quite know what to say about it," space policy expert John Logsdon of George Washington University said. Writing on NASAWatch, Keith Cowing called the study request a "Hail Mary" pass to save the life of the SLS ahead of Trump installing a budget cutter to head the space agency. The Government Accountability Office estimates the costs of SLS and its two planned launches (a second, crewed mission is planned for 2023) at $23 billion.

3 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. How much to re-create Apollo? by davidwr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How expensive would it be to re-create the Apollo program?

    Would it be cheaper to do an "Apollo plus" with SOME modern technology where modern tech happens to be cheaper or the same price, but leaving out modern tech where it's more expensive?

    In other words, would we save $BIGBUCKS by building on what we have instead of starting nearly from scratch?

    Before anyone points it out, I am aware that significant amounts of the original Apollo program's designs have been lost, either literally though lost blueprints/design-documents or in practice because the "institutional knowledge" is long-gone. I also know that the original manufacturing facilities are long gone and they would have to be rebuilt. However, significant parts of the design work is either available or easily reverse-engineered, so we wouldn't be starting from scratch.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  2. Re: Great idea... But there is a problem... by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

    While they are different ways to get there, one path is to first establish a moon base and launch from there instead of Earth orbit.

    Launch what, exactly, from the Moon?

    I think you're confusing "a moon base" with "a full industrial infrastructure capable of producing complex objects". Even the concept that it would be cheaper to launch unrefined raw regolith from the moon cheaper than we can launch equivalent mass payloads from Earth anytime even remotely soon is absurd.

    Earth is where industry is. The fact that we're a deep gravity well increases costs, but that difference is nothing compared to the difference in industrial capacities on and off Earth. Every production process has feedstock and consumables dependency chains. Those have dependency chains, and those have further chains, to a massive network of ever-increasing complexity. One of the worst dependencies is humans, which in turn spawn massive dependency chains.

    Now, ultimately you can meet these things to the degree that the few things you have to import to sustain local industrial activity (at incredible cost) do not price the cost of local rocket launches out of the market., but if you think that's going to happen any time in the next few decades, you're deluding yourself. The serious proposals for going to the moon before Mars are for the moon to function as a testbed for habitats and systems designed for Mars.

    Anyway, I'm personally much more for the habitation of Venus than Mars, but that is neither here nor there :)

    --
    I'll never forget the last thing grandma said to me before she died: "What are you doing in here with that knife?!?"
  3. Missed opportunity.... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We could have had a permanent moon base by the end of the second Gingrich administration ...

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact