Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Thursday February 21 2019, @07:38PM   Printer-friendly
from the posted-exactly-as-submitted dept.

"NASA has largely been living off the successes of space projects launched up to a decade ago — including the now 'dead' Mars Opportunity rover. It hopes to launch its first manned space flight since the demise of the Space Shuttle program in 2011.

..........

But now the Trump administration appears to be determined to get a new Moon project off the ground. And it's eager to pay private companies to carry its cargoes.

NASA has been considering the prospect of a 'Lunar Gateway' space station placed in orbit around the Moon, acting as a stopover point for missions to the surface and, perhaps, Mars.

.............

NASA documents indicate the earliest date for an American to tread the lunar surface again is 2028." foxnews.com/science/nasas-new-grand-space-race-plan

Hopefully we can speed that one up.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday February 21 2019, @07:53PM (2 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday February 21 2019, @07:53PM (#804672) Journal

    Land on the surface, build a base. Use a lava tube [soylentnews.org] or dig if needed. Use solar power (near poles) and/or fission [soylentnews.org].

    How to Get Back to the Moon in 4 Years, Permanently [soylentnews.org] (even cheaper if using BFR)

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 2) by RandomFactor on Thursday February 21 2019, @08:18PM (1 child)

      by RandomFactor (3682) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 21 2019, @08:18PM (#804684) Journal

      But now the Trump administration appears to be determined to get a new Moon project off the ground. And it's eager to pay private companies to carry its cargoes.

      Timing wise this seems more likely to accrue to the credit of the one that follows him more than him.

      --
      В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
      • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Friday February 22 2019, @03:33AM

        by deimtee (3272) on Friday February 22 2019, @03:33AM (#804848) Journal

        Timing wise this seems more likely to accrue to the credit of the one that follows him more than him.

        They did it in less than 10 years with Apollo. If they can do that again he will only be in his third term.

        --
        If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday February 21 2019, @08:34PM (6 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 21 2019, @08:34PM (#804695) Journal

    NASA documents indicate the earliest date for an American to tread the lunar surface again is 2028."

    Does NASA really think that the SLS will be even close to ready for a flight test by 2028 ?

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday February 21 2019, @08:47PM (5 children)

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday February 21 2019, @08:47PM (#804701) Journal

      NASA Could Scale Down First Manned Flight of the SLS [soylentnews.org]

      I am pessimistic about your pessimism. If SLS's first flight is massively delayed, SpaceX has a chance to completely kill it using Starship/BFR. If SLS does fly, it will probably end up flying a few times and wasting many more billions of dollars.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:28PM (2 children)

        by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:28PM (#804744) Journal

        I am pessimistic about your pessimism of my pessimism.

        Even if SpaceX completely nails everything and becomes massively successful, this will be taken as proof that the US Senate must put MORE money into SLS. After all, they've already sunk too much cost in to stop now! (plus it puts pork into every senate district)

        Now to inject a note of pessimistic optimism.

        I predict that by the mid 2030s, SLS will finally fly as a payload on some new, yet unimagined, SpaceX launcher.

        --
        People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
        • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:56PM (1 child)

          by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:56PM (#804762) Journal

          I am pessimistic about your pessimism of the the prior poster's pessimism about your pessimism.

          No, I have no point, other than trying to get the word pessimism and derivatives of it as many times as possible in an reply.

          Meow! [youtube.com]

          --
          This sig for rent.
          • (Score: 4, Interesting) by driverless on Thursday February 21 2019, @11:42PM

            by driverless (4770) on Thursday February 21 2019, @11:42PM (#804780)

            I'm pessimistic about being pessimistic about... ahh, whatever. Looking back over the last few decades, there's some new announcement about grand space plans (major manned missions, that sort of thing) for NASA every few years, of which exactly zero have come to fruition. The last grand plan that they actually saw through to completion was the Space Shuttle from the 1970s. So following the decades-long established pattern, this one will go nowhere.

      • (Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Friday February 22 2019, @03:38AM (1 child)

        by ElizabethGreene (6748) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 22 2019, @03:38AM (#804850) Journal

        It's under contract to develop and fly, so the billions are spent either way. Getting out of the contract is laughably unlikely.

        • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday February 22 2019, @03:51AM

          by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Friday February 22 2019, @03:51AM (#804858) Journal

          A certain number of $billions are allocated to SLS, Orion, etc. through NASA each year. If Congress wants to cut that money off, they can do it (NASA has actually gotten more than requested to prevent the schedule from slipping more). But it's going to require great success on the part of SpaceX, great failure on the part of the SLS contractors, and probably a PR campaign. Nothing stopping it from happening though.

          --
          [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 21 2019, @09:33PM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 21 2019, @09:33PM (#804720)

    All Presidents have had bold space ideas, but the nitty gritty of reality keep biting into such ideas.

    1. Money: During recessions there's pressure to clip out non-essentials, and recessions typically come about every 10 years. Plus, we have bigly debt now.

    2. Politics: Congress has to agree to fund space ideas, and sometimes they will disagree simply because it came from the other party. Party A doesn't want to give Party B bragging points for the next election.

    3. Privatization limits: NASA has been trying to increase privatization for a long time. Most space systems are already built by private contractors. The problem is that many missions are often one-off projects such as to not provide the necessarily competition and repetition to push market forces further.

    • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:08PM (4 children)

      by bob_super (1357) on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:08PM (#804739)

      Three reasons while the Chinese will get there first, even if they use old-school rockets and not 21st-century reusable ones.

      • (Score: 2) by martyb on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:34PM (3 children)

        by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:34PM (#804747) Journal

        Three reasons while the Chinese will get there first, even if they use old-school rockets and not 21st-century reusable ones.

        Ummm... "will" get there first? They have already been there [wikipedia.org]. And, they are back at it again, but this time on the far side [wikipedia.org] of the moon; the first time ever by anyone.

        --
        Wit is intellect, dancing.
        • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday February 21 2019, @11:08PM (2 children)

          by bob_super (1357) on Thursday February 21 2019, @11:08PM (#804767)

          I meant actual Chinese people.
          The US got to the Moon when it had a Russian fire under its ass, then decided it had enough boxes checked and ICBM street cred.
          Moving to LEO with the Shuttle was driven by military requirements too. Every other human spaceflight has been half-hearted for lack of a clear military scenario.

          The Chinese get their turn at proving they are to be reckoned with, but they are doing without trying to be first or biggest, just focused on the long game.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @12:38AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @12:38AM (#804803)

            I think you used "while" subconsciously because you're secretly Xi Jinping trying to keep people apathetic while you take over the moon.

            We're on to you!!! The Moon belongs to the US, everyone says so.

          • (Score: 2) by martyb on Friday February 22 2019, @02:07AM

            by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 22 2019, @02:07AM (#804822) Journal

            As I understand it, the reason the USA stopped the space race was the general public did not see the value of going to the moon again. At that time, the economy was going downhill and spending $$$$ on space when there were pressing problems and protests down here on Earth which were also vying for funding... well, eventually, Apollo got cut.

            As for the shuttle being military. My understanding was that to try and salvage enough funding to get it off the ground (heh!), they needed to form an alliance with the defense department. That resulted in new requirements that made the shuttle more expensive. If NASA could have gotten away with funding the shuttle without involving the military, I'm sure they would have actually preferred that.

            Agreed that China is in it for the long game. ISTR they are planning a moon base in not--too-many years. Yup! Here's a link [space.com]. I have little doubt that they are capable of making it happen, too. That just *might* wake up the powers-that-be in the USA to sit up and pay attention. May even get more funding for NASA. OTOH, there would be plenty of funding for NASA, and IMNSHO much more progress, if congress just told NASA what they wanted and left it to NASA to figure out how they wanted to go about getting it!

            --
            Wit is intellect, dancing.
    • (Score: 4, Touché) by DannyB on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:31PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:31PM (#804745) Journal

      All Presidents have had bold space ideas, but the nitty gritty of reality keep biting into such ideas.

      But all previous presidents, as you say, have been constrained by reality.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday February 22 2019, @03:14PM

      by tangomargarine (667) on Friday February 22 2019, @03:14PM (#805059)

      Money: During recessions there's pressure to clip out non-essentials

      Just give them some of the ridiculous amounts of money we spend on the military, damn.

      --
      "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday February 22 2019, @07:55PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday February 22 2019, @07:55PM (#805276) Journal

      All Presidents have had bold space ideas

      And they should stop it!

      Changing directions every four or eight years on projects that can take decades is completely ridiculous.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:58PM (1 child)

    by Thexalon (636) on Thursday February 21 2019, @10:58PM (#804763)

    When it comes to space, every president wants to be Kennedy, setting the goal of doing something incredible. Many presidents want to be Nixon enjoying the photo ops with those who just did something incredible that they can kinda take credit for. Nobody at all wants to be Lyndon Johnson, who paid for NASA throughout his presidency but got neither the glory of the initial declaration nor the triumph of carrying the plan to fruition.

    That's a real problem: Science and engineering doesn't happen in convenient 4-year cycles where a president can propose something at the beginning of their term and have something impressive to show their constituents just prior to the relevant Tuesday in November a few years later. There has to be a willingness to see through what the previous guy proposed and NASA started working on, and so far nobody in my lifetime has had the guts to say something like "Yup, we're going to spend billions on this program, and we're not going to see any return on that until well after my term is up."

    Instead, what we're getting is "NASA is going to do X!" and NASA starts working on that, and then a few years later it's "NASA is going to do Y!" and then they have to throw out what they did on X because the tech is obsolete 10 years later when somebody else comes along and tells them to get back to it. No wonder they're having a hard time getting things done when the mission constantly changes.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday February 22 2019, @07:57PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday February 22 2019, @07:57PM (#805280) Journal

      It's like Schrödinger's-celestial-body.

      We're going to the moon, or mars, and we won't know which until we get there.

  • (Score: 2) by Username on Thursday February 21 2019, @11:36PM (2 children)

    by Username (4557) on Thursday February 21 2019, @11:36PM (#804777)

    Seems the only goal of most human space travel is prestige, so once you've done it, there is no point in doing it again. There should be a real goal behind it. Like mining or manufacturing.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by martyb on Friday February 22 2019, @02:23AM (1 child)

      by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 22 2019, @02:23AM (#804826) Journal

      Seems the only goal of most human space travel is prestige, so once you've done it, there is no point in doing it again. There should be a real goal behind it. Like mining or manufacturing.

      Or... retiring. Not because of the scenery or the like, but for the lower gravity. Even if the accommodations were no better than that in a cheap hotel, getting weight off one's tired and aching ankles, knees, hips, and/or spine would be a reasonable trade-off for some well-healed retirees. Heavy pain meds only go so far. Removing the burden on worn joints and being relatively pain free? For some, that would be priceless, and there are some who have the money to pay for it. I give it about 10-15 years or so for that to be a genuine possibility. Even if just for a few months' respite... there's money to be made!

      --
      Wit is intellect, dancing.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @03:50AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 22 2019, @03:50AM (#804857)

        Zero gee isn't going to be good for retirees, too many health problems and new reflexes to learn. So are you expecting lunar or O'Neill?

        My guess would be O'Neill for the short term respite visits, could be either for the permanent. Either way they are going to be luxurious habitats for the super-rich to start with. (I would also expect lunar/asteroid mining and a massive SPS program before we get to retirement homes. China has already announced a 1MW pilot SPS and large comfortable habitats are going to require a lot of resources.)

(1)