NASA on target for return to the moon by 2020: officials

[Kärnfysikern]

NASA on target for return to the moon by 2020: officials

http://www.moondaily.com/reports/NAS...cials_999.html

Despite funding uncertainty, NASA is on track to return humans to the moon by 2020 and set up a lunar outpost to serve as a springboard to explore Mars, officials said Monday.

"Our job is to build towns on the moon and eventually put tire prints on Mars," NASA's Rick Gilbrech told reporters here, one year after the US space agency unveiled an ambitious plan to site a solar-powered, manned outpost on the south pole of the moon.

"We have the International Space Station; we're going to have a lunar outpost, and someday, certainly, somebody will go to Mars," said Jeff Hanley, head of NASA's Constellation program, which is developing the tools to return humans to the moon.

"Thirty-five years ago this week, Gene Cernan, Ron Evans and Jack Schmitt were on the surface of the moon. We are working hard to return a future generation of astronauts to the moon," said space flight veteran Carl Walz, who now works for NASA's exploration systems mission directorate.

Despite budgetary constraints, NASA hoped to have Constellation fully operational by 2016, Gilbrech said.

"We're hoping we get a budget passed by Congress," he said, pointing out that only six-tenths of a penny of every tax dollar went to funding NASA's space programs.

"We're making plans to be ready for any and all scenarios. The (budget proposal) we put in keeps our program on track for the March 2015 initial operating capability... and full operating capability a year later," Gilbrech, who leads new spacecraft development at NASA, said.

"That will enable the human-moon return by the 2020 date that the president envisioned."

President George W. Bush in 2004 announced a plan to resume human flights to the moon after a decades-long gap.

"We're doing this effort to get back to the moon in phases," said Hanley.

He recalled that the first phase involved retiring NASA's space shuttle in 2010 after completing construction of the International Space Station.

Following that, attention will be focused on building the shuttle's successor, the Orion crew vehicle and Ares launcher of the new Constellation program, he said.

"Very soon, and we have already begun at a low level, we will ramp up rapidly to build the big systems which are the Ares V rocket and the lunar lander and the surface systems that will be put in place on the moon," Hanley said, again stressing budgetary constraints faced by NASA.

"We will begin that build-up after 2010 because that's how our budget is put together. We're going as we can pay, so to speak. This is a long-range strategy we're rolling out over the next two decades and more," he said.

"It will be a challenge, a challenge to do it on budgets the Apollo missions didn't have to deal with, and to get people interested and keep them interested," he said.

"In May 1961, then US president John F. Kennedy proposal to send astronauts to the moon before the end of the decade launched the Apollo era."

The pioneering program achieved its goal eight years later, on July 20, 1969, when Apollo 11 commander Neil Armstrong became the first man to set foot on the moon.

The December 1972 flight of Apollo 17, with Cernan, Evans and Schmitt on board, was the last manned mission to the moon for the United States.

[Logan13]

why?

[Kärnfysikern]

You could ask the same thing about alot of other scientific and engineering endeavors.

But if you want a long term reason there is wast resources in space that can be taken advantage of if we can cut down launch costs and/or have a base on the moon. I doubt that is the plan right now though but that is a real good reason to put more money into space tech.

Then we offcourse have trivial reasons like survival of humanity and not to forget that we will get the ability to deflect incoming objects on collision course.

[thegodfather]

why?

It will be used as a model for a future mission to Mars....

As well, Im sure that many people asked Christopher Colombus and a lot of other explorers "Why?"... The question should really by, why not? Why did we goto the moon and then just.....................stop? The universe compared to the size of our world, there is so much to explore, so why not do it? I think its only a natural and logical progression to journey into uncharted territory. The earth may have kept us busy for a couple of thousand years while we explored the entire thing, but the universe will certainly keep us busy for millions upon millions of years. And, it is only logical that one day space travel to other planets, will be as natural and routine as driving to Florida for a weekend getaway. Thats my take on it at least, and I hope that one day that is the case.

[Flagg]

why?

Why? What the Hell.

Progression for a start. Plus I believe space exploration and space tech is the key to humanities survival.

Recently i've been wondering what our future will be like, say 200 hundered years in the future. I would like to think there will be cities on the Moon and Mars by then.

[eliteforce]

for the money they wasted having bases in iraq they could have built a city on the moon

[MuscleScience]

for the money they wasted having bases in iraq they could have built a city on the moon

Yeah or they could have used that money to crack down on the evil steroid users.

[MuscleScience]

why?

I figured you of all people would be all about this.

[RA]

I knew someone would throw this in

But, Im excited at the prospect. Its about time we went back.

for the money they wasted having bases in iraq they could have built a city on the moon

[Kratos]

They never went to the moon, the whole thing was staged in a movie studio so the Russians would think we were awsome.

[Red Ketchup]

Considering what we managed (to go to the moon) with late 60's technology, I would be really curious to see what we can achieve today!

Setting up a simple research lab up there should be possible.

I also think that they should open that to private enterprise... if there is a buck to be made, capitalism will make it happen (yes I am a Heinlein fan ).

Red

[Logan13]

I figured you of all people would be all about this.

We have been teased by the prospect of going to Mars for the last 20 years, so perhaps I am being a bit short-sighted. This is a necessary step that will aid in our eventual trip to the Red planet. I am just anxious.

[Logan13]

It will be used as a model for a future mission to Mars....

As well, Im sure that many people asked Christopher Colombus and a lot of other explorers "Why?"... The question should really by, why not? Why did we goto the moon and then just.....................stop? The universe compared to the size of our world, there is so much to explore, so why not do it? I think its only a natural and logical progression to journey into uncharted territory. The earth may have kept us busy for a couple of thousand years while we explored the entire thing, but the universe will certainly keep us busy for millions upon millions of years. And, it is only logical that one day space travel to other planets, will be as natural and routine as driving to Florida for a weekend getaway. Thats my take on it at least, and I hope that one day that is the case.

They did not ask him "why" after he had all ready been there 40 years prior........

[Z12]

Aren't there more pressing issues / important things to spend our taxpayer money on? IMO, people need to consider where space travel is on their list of priorities. If I were making the decisions, space exploration would be at the bottom of my list. Maybe we should fix social security, national debt, healthcare system, college tuition costs, etc., before we talk about outposts on the moon. There are plenty of costly problems here on earth - our one true home.

[SMCengineer]

I also think that they should open that to private enterprise...

So do I.

[qualityclrk1]

They never went to the moon, the whole thing was staged in a movie studio so the Russians would think we were awsome.

ooooo Kratos we watch waaaaaaaaaaay too much tv lol.....i've seen the show on that as well- how they talked about how there is no wind on the moon so how was the flag waving and how that desert is IDENTICAL to the moon lol....idk man, i just think thats a whole lot of shit to fake, especially with the cold war goin on, i don't think we could have pulled off the hoax- i'm sure the soviets checked it out...

[qualityclrk1]

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

[Kärnfysikern]

Aren't there more pressing issues / important things to spend our taxpayer money on? IMO, people need to consider where space travel is on their list of priorities. If I were making the decisions, space exploration would be at the bottom of my list. Maybe we should fix social security, national debt, healthcare system, college tuition costs, etc., before we talk about outposts on the moon. There are plenty of costly problems here on earth - our one true home.

This reasoning I just cant understand. Considering how little money is acctualy spent on space travel and how big the returns from it might be Id say its not a concern. NASA's budget is a tiny tiny tiny drop in the ocean, there are far more costly programs with far less return(the F-22 raptor program for instance costs 62billion, half of the cost of the apollo program).

We have been teased by the prospect of going to Mars for the last 20 years, so perhaps I am being a bit short-sighted. This is a necessary step that will aid in our eventual trip to the Red planet. I am just anxious.

No kidding, its going to damn slow and there is one major reason for it beeing slow and expensive and its because we are still using pathetic old obsolete chemical rocket technology.

For space travel to become a reality(and not just a fancy show like apollo) the cost of putting something into earth orbit must be decreased by several orders of magnitude. Something totaly new like laser propulsion, nuclear thermal propulsion or electromagnetic catapults are needed. Unfortunaly laser propulsion gets pathetic funding, nuclear thermal propulsion is politicaly unfavorable and electromagnetic catapults are still mostly untested.

For the tech geeks on this forum here is 2 links about laser propulsion

Fission-activated laser as primary power for CW laser propulsion

Ground-to-orbit laser propulsion: Advanced applications