SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the One-of-these-days,-Alice...-to-the-Moon! dept.
Trump adds $1.6 billion to NASA budget request to kick start 'Artemis' moon mission
The Trump administration is adding an additional $1.6 billion to NASA's $21 billion 2020 budget request to kick start plans to return American astronauts to the moon in 2024, four years earlier than previously planned, NASA announced Monday. In a surprise announcement, agency Administrator Jim Bridenstine said the revitalized moon program will be named Artemis after the Greek goddess of the moon.
[...] According to a NASA fact sheet, the new budget request includes $1 billion "to enable NASA to being supporting the development of commercial human lunar landing systems three years earlier than previously envisioned. This acquisition strategy will allow NASA to purchase an integrated commercial lunar lander that will transport astronauts from lunar orbit to the lunar surface and back."
Gateway development will be limited to what is needed to make the station a viable staging base for trips to the surface. That will free up $321 million for other moon spending. An additional $651 million is earmarked for the Space Launch System — SLS — heavy lift rocket and Orion spacecraft. Lunar surface technologies and propulsion systems would receive an additional $132 million with $90 million going to robotic exploration and research near the moon's south pole.
[...] The same day Bridenstine talked of the challenge of landing on the moon, Amazon-founder Jeff Bezos unveiled a lunar lander called Blue Moon that could put 6.5 metric tons on the surface of the moon. He said Blue Moon, carrying an ascent stage, could meet NASA's schedule for landing astronauts on the surface by 2024.
Previously: NASA Chief Says a Falcon Heavy Rocket Could Fly Humans to the Moon
Here's Why NASA's Audacious Return to the Moon Just Might Work
Lockheed Martin Proposes Streamlined Lunar Gateway for 2024 Manned Lunar Landing
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 14 2019, @07:39PM (4 children)
Why does NASA want to bother with a manned mission to the moon?
Besides the obvious ~$23 billion added to their budget, is there any specific scientific goal that needs people on the moon?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Tuesday May 14 2019, @09:50PM (3 children)
Not only scientific but very scientific: if US don't put people on the Moon first, the Chinese will do it.
And get a chunk of excellent real estate, like the South Pole–Aitken basin [wikipedia.org] - shielded from solar radiation, water as ice, thiner planetary crust that should get easier access to minerals. Establish a defends post on Leibnitz mountains and you deny that estate to any intruder.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 14 2019, @11:55PM (1 child)
Let me guess, that answer wasn't intended to be very scientific? Maybe very sarcastic?
My view is that the science-only angle is a dead end. Humanity can have all kinds of curiosity, but there's not much to gain from knowledge you rarely use. Exploring space with emphasis only on the scientific aspect has already overextended itself.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 15 2019, @12:19AM
This makes you very observant today.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday May 15 2019, @01:28PM
.
By definition, any "intruder" would have access to space technology. They would be coming in from Earth at high speed. If they are serious about taking that location, they could simply hit the "defence post" with a kinetic strike against which any "defences" would be utterly useless. Then you just circle back round, touch down and build your own base on the smouldering remains of the previous one.
Space technology really does change the dynamics of warfare. Everyone is effectively packing megaton-scale weaponry that an immobile target cannot defend against.