PDA

View Full Version : "We choose to go to the Moon": NASA Unveils Moon Plan



Caveat Emperor
09-19-2005, 11:05 AM
Per CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/09/15/nasa.moon/index.html) :

(SPACE.com) -- NASA briefed senior White House officials Wednesday on its plan to spend $100 billion and the next 12 years building the spacecraft and rockets it needs to put humans back on the Moon by 2018.

The space agency now expects to roll out its lunar exploration plan to key Congressional committees on Friday and to the broader public through a news conference on Monday, Washington sources tell SPACE.com.

U.S. President George W. Bush called in January 2004 for the United States to return to the Moon by 2020 as the first major step in a broader space exploration vision aimed at extending the human presence throughout the solar system.

NASA has been working intensely since April on an exploration plan that entails building an 18-foot blunt body crew capsule and launchers built from major space shuttle components including the main engines, solid rocket boosters and massive external fuel tanks.

That plan, called the Exploration Systems Architecture Study, was presented by NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, his space operations chief Bill Gerstenmaier and several other senior agency officials Wednesday afternoon to senior White House policy officials, including an advisor to U.S. Vice President Richard Cheney and the president's Deputy National Security Advisor J.D. Crouch.

NASA's plan, according to briefing charts obtained by SPACE.com, envisions beginning a sustained lunar exploration campaign in 2018 by landing four astronauts on the Moon for a seven-day stay.

The expedition would begin, these charts show, by launching the lunar lander and Earth departure stage (essentially a giant propulsion module) on a heavy-lift launch vehicle that would be lifted into orbit by five space shuttle main engines and a pair of five-segment shuttle solid rocket boosters.

Once the Earth departure stage and lunar lander are safely in orbit, NASA would launch the Crew Exploration Vehicle capsule atop a new launcher built from a four-segment shuttle solid rocket booster and an upper stage powered by a single space shuttle main engine.

The CEV would then dock with the lunar lander and Earth departure stage and begin its several day journey to the Moon.

NASA's plan envisions being able to land four-person human crews anywhere on the Moon's surface and to eventually use the system to transport crew members to and from a lunar outpost that it would consider building on the lunar south pole, according to the charts, because of the regions elevated quantities of hydrogen and possibly water ice.

One of NASA's reasons for going back to the Moon is to demonstrate that astronauts can essentially "live off the land" by using lunar resources to produce potable water, fuel and other valuable commodities.

Such capabilities are considered extremely important to human expeditions to Mars which, because of the distances involved, would be much longer missions entailing a minimum of 500 days spent on the planet's surface.

NASA's Crew Exploration Vehicle is expected to cost $5.5 billion to develop, according to government and industry sources, and the Crew Launch Vehicle another $4.5 billion. The heavy-lift launcher, which would be capable of lofting 125 metric tons of payload, is expected to cost more than $5 billion but less than $10 billion to develop, according to these sources.

NASA's plan also calls for using the Crew Exploration Vehicle, equipped with as many as six seats, to transport astronauts to and from the international space station. An unmanned version of the Crew Exploration Vehicle could be used to deliver a limited amount of cargo to the space station.

NASA would like to field the Crew Exploration Vehicle by 2011, or within a year of when it plans to fly the space shuttle for the last time. Development of the heavy lift launcher, lunar lander and Earth departure stage would begin in 2011.

By that time, according to NASA's charts, the space agency would expect to be spending $7 billion a year on its exploration efforts, a figure projected to grow to more than $15 billion a year by 2018, that date NASA has targeted for its first human lunar landing since Apollo 17 in 1972.

I'm one of the biggest advocates of the manned space program you're going to find. I think that the benefits recieved often far outweigh the costs, when you consider technological advancements made that have direct impact on our daily lives.

However...my only question is why the deadline is set at 2018? That's thirteen years...when Kennedy set his original challenge, in an era where technology was outright stone-age by comparison, we fulfilled the dream in under a decade. Now, to go back, it's going to take us 13 years? It just seems like a boondoggle waiting to happen.

So...what do you guys think? The space program: Worth it, or a waste of money?

westofyou
09-19-2005, 11:10 AM
The Moon... America's Space Programs answer to vacationing... every year Myrtle Beach.....Lot #16 at the Pines Campground, lunch atPatricks Pirate Cove and Dinner at the Beach Comber.

The kicker is you can bring your clubs to both places.

RANDY IN INDY
09-19-2005, 12:20 PM
I heard that they were going to have to lengthen the par 5's on the moon because of driver and ball technology. ;)

traderumor
09-19-2005, 12:42 PM
I've always thought it was a waste of money, which when I say it around the house triggers something akin to a creation vs. evolution debate with my wife. She tells me that we have many reasons to be thankful for, from inventions to scientific reasons, but I've always viewed it more as "because its there" as the primary reasoning. I could use some enlightening, I'm sure, but on the priority list, when we have people throwing millions of dollars toward Katrina victims (rightfully so) that the recipients would not have gotten except for a natural disaster hitting their back yards, I'm a little uneasy about our Fed spending on other worlds when we do not appear to be adequately taking care of people in our own neighborhood. That wasn't a political answer was it? :evil:

Chip R
09-19-2005, 12:43 PM
I'm not sure why we're going to the moon since we've been there and done that.

traderumor
09-19-2005, 12:44 PM
I'm not sure why we're going to the moon since we've been there and done that.I'm sure there is a 1000 page "brief" somewhere on the internet explaining why we need to go back. ;)

wheels
09-19-2005, 12:49 PM
I don't think we should blow up the moon...There are plenty of things to blow up on our own planet.

wheels
09-19-2005, 12:50 PM
I'm not sure why we're going to the moon since we've been there and done that.

Do you really believe that we actually went to the moon in the first place?

pedro
09-19-2005, 12:52 PM
Do you really believe that we actually went to the moon in the first place?

Yes I do. But when we got to the moon there was a Nazi flag already there.

Oh, and some giant space monsters.

WMR
09-19-2005, 12:53 PM
I'm not sure why we're going to the moon since we've been there and done that.

The article made it sound like it's a necessary stepping stone to a manned space flight to Mars.

Blimpie
09-19-2005, 01:38 PM
Do you really believe that we actually went to the moon in the first place?Carl Everett just swerved off the road....

Johnny Footstool
09-19-2005, 02:13 PM
I don't think we should blow up the moon...There are plenty of things to blow up on our own planet.

We're Earthlings, let's blow up Earth things.

KronoRed
09-19-2005, 02:21 PM
How many times since the late 70's has NASA announced plans to return to the moon or go to mars? once every 5 years it seems, it'll never happen, it's expensive and nobody can find a good economical way to do it.

Reds4Life
09-19-2005, 02:22 PM
Can we send Eric Milton and DanO to the moon?

And forget to bring them back.

http://pichold.com/Images/Smilies/fingersx.gif

westofyou
09-19-2005, 02:23 PM
Melies got there over 100 years ago, it's already been done.

http://www.filmsite.org/posters/voya.gif

Roy Tucker
09-19-2005, 02:48 PM
Earth needs cheese.

ochre
09-19-2005, 02:54 PM
Tanstaafl

pedro
09-19-2005, 02:55 PM
Tanstaafl

guess that means you're not buying it. ;)

paintmered
09-19-2005, 02:57 PM
Just because.

http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/redruth/519/images/marvin_k9.jpg

Unassisted
09-19-2005, 03:49 PM
I'm not sure why we're going to the moon since we've been there and done that.Mars is like a deserted island that you can only get to with a rowboat and what you can carry in that rowboat. In order to learn how to live there, we have to practice camping on deserted islands that are close by. The moon is just for practice and it's a 3-day ride in the rowboat, while the Mars trip is 3-4 months each way.

traderumor
09-19-2005, 04:25 PM
Mars is like a deserted island that you can only get to with a rowboat and what you can carry in that rowboat. In order to learn how to live there, we have to practice camping on deserted islands that are close by. The moon is just for practice and it's a 3-day ride in the rowboat, while the Mars trip is 3-4 months each way.That would be quite a cruise. I bet you could catch up on some reading while you were on the way.

Reds/Flyers Fan
09-19-2005, 05:15 PM
Man back on the moon by 2018.

McDonald's and Wal-Mart on the moon by 2021.

GAC
09-19-2005, 08:23 PM
The cow jumped it at far less cost. ;)

wheels
09-19-2005, 08:47 PM
We're Earthlings, let's blow up Earth things.

Hey Mr. Monkey you don't need to ask why.

We'll teach you not to mess with God's America.


Finally....Somebody that knows about Mr. Show!

Johnny Footstool
09-20-2005, 12:17 AM
Hey Mr. Monkey you don't need to ask why.

We'll teach you not to mess with God's America.

Ah, yes, C.S. Lewis Jr. -- my favorite country singer.

smith288
01-12-2006, 10:50 AM
I believe rumblings from China is that they would like to arm it as a potential base... Moon wars with Chinese people...now that will be good reality tv.

(man, this was an old thread)

deltachi8
01-12-2006, 10:56 AM
"WE CHOOSE TO GO"

Just wierd, its the "mission name" for Mission Space at Epcot - the fake flight to Mars. (A terrific attraction by the way.)

Yachtzee
01-12-2006, 11:35 AM
Mars Needs Women

westofyou
01-12-2006, 11:37 AM
Mars Needs Women
Oh man! Wonder if he'll ever know
He's in the best selling show
Is there life on Mars?

deltachi8
01-12-2006, 11:39 AM
i heard there were Amazon women on the Moon, maybee thats why we go back?

Yachtzee
01-12-2006, 11:40 AM
Maybe we should follow the Carpenters' example and just call a cab (http://www.lyricsfreak.com/c/carpenters/27556.html).

westofyou
01-12-2006, 11:41 AM
i heard there were Amazon women on the Moon, maybee thats why we go back?
I heard it's because one of the guys left his sunglasses in that cool car they had up there.

traderumor
01-12-2006, 01:51 PM
Mars Needs WomenWomen are from Venus. Men are from Mars. Everyone knows that.

westofyou
01-12-2006, 03:28 PM
In 1963, baseball pitcher Gaylord Perry remarked, "They'll put a man on the moon before I hit a home run." On July 20, 1969, a few hours after Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon, Gaylord Perry hit his first, and only, home run.

gonelong
01-12-2006, 04:58 PM
I hesitate to do this as I might mess with the space/time continuim or something, but WOY, I believe you have your historical facts incorrect here.

Perry has 6 HRs to his credit.

GL

RFS62
01-12-2006, 04:59 PM
Perry has 6 HRs to his credit, don't sell the man short. Sound awful urban legendy to me.

GL


It's true. I heard Gaylord tell that story on XM.

westofyou
01-12-2006, 05:04 PM
I hesitate to do this as I might mess with the space/time continuim or something, but WOY, I believe you have your historical facts incorrect here.

Perry has 6 HRs to his credit.

GL

You're right I copied that from Roy's big page of facts... well maybe...

http://www.kellys.com/know.html


Anyway the story is true, and looky who he hit it off, former Red.


San Francisco Giants AB R H RBI BB SO PO A
Bonds rf 3 1 0 0 1 2 1 0
Hunt 2b 4 1 1 0 1 0 1 6
Mays cf 4 1 2 1 1 0 1 0
McCovey 1b 3 1 1 2 1 1 16 1
Davenport 3b 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Henderson lf 4 0 1 0 0 2 0 0
Lanier ss 4 1 2 0 0 0 1 5
Barton c 4 1 2 1 0 0 6 0
Perry p 4 1 1 1 0 2 1 2
Totals 33 7 10 5 5 7 27 15

FIELDING -
DP: 2.
E: Lanier (13).

BATTING -
2B: Hunt (13,off Osteen); Mays (11,off Osteen); Barton (1,off Brewer).
HR: Perry (1,3rd inning off Osteen 0 on, 2 out); McCovey (30,4th inning off
Osteen 1 on, 0 out).
HBP: Bonds (6,by Brewer).
IBB: McCovey (25,by Brewer).
Team LOB: 8.

gonelong
01-12-2006, 05:04 PM
It's true. I heard Gaylord tell that story on XM.

Either way, I messed up the space/time thingy, check my post and the post you quoted. :eek:

GL