In pursuit of President Bush's ambitious space exploration goals, NASA has awarded the contract for the crew exploration vehicle - the ship that will take us back to the Moon, and perhaps on the Mars:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- NASA on Thursday gave a multibillion-dollar contract to build a manned lunar spaceship to Lockheed Martin Corp., the aerospace leader that usually builds unmanned rockets.
The nation's space agency plans to use the Orion crew exploration vehicle to replace the space shuttle fleet, take astronauts to the moon and perhaps to Mars. Unlike Apollo and earlier spacecraft perched atop rockets, it will be reusable. NASA estimated the cost at $7.5 billion through 2019 for likely eight separate spaceships.
I don't like the fact that we're only building 8 of them - I'd figure it'd be much better to, oh, build 50 ships...the more, the better (in terms of the total Federal budget, even 50 would be a trivial amount of money). There is a questing spirit in the human species, and it is especially strong in the American people. A strong space exploration program will demonstrate that with courage and faith, we can overcome and rise to new heights - Moon, Mars and other space exploration would be a tonic to a world grown cynical and self-absorbed.
They are also taking too long about it - the first Moon shot isn't to be until 2019 - 50 years after the first Moon landing! Come on - we can do much better than that. I'm sure just a bit more expenditure would get us to the Moon by 2011.
Onward and upward - lets get out there and explore our solar system.
Posted by Mark Noonan at September 1, 2006 01:19 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/crawford.cgi/7796
Comments
Give Donald Trump and other private companies the rights to build on the moon, and we'll see 'Tranquility Towers' or 'Earthview City' by 2010.
Posted by: Hermie at September 1, 2006 01:27 PM
I totally agree with you Mark - we should be doing more to explore space. 50 vehicles would be a good start.
We need to be more ambitious. It appears the Chinese will make an attempt at the moon long before we return there in 2019. I wouldn't bet against them.
But the budget realities are this: we're broke. Very very broke. And getting steadily broker. Consider this: right now, we are spending almost $10 billion/month fighting in Iraq. According to the NY Times article this morning on the award of the new contract to Lockheed, the entire Space Shuttle program going back to the early 1980's cost about $10 billion.
$10 billion for one month of operations in Iraq, or $10 billion for 20+ years of manned space flight? hmmm. yep, I think we have our budget priorities all screwed up.
Posted by: Aarontime at September 1, 2006 02:17 PM
Hermie - not sure I want a Trump Towers on the moon, but I am sure that privitaztion would be a better route. Maybe giving tax breaks to companies that are working on space vehicles for private use, or planning on private colonies would be a good idea. As well as removing road blocks set up by having the government (NASA) so heavily involved in space.
Posted by: kjstrouble at September 1, 2006 03:36 PM
aarontime - if by almost 10 you mean 8 I guess so - but whats a few billion among friends.
Space exploration brought us tons of industrial and consumer products. But honestly, I'd rather see us start building in Antarctica - at least there's air and water there.
Posted by: Kahn at September 1, 2006 04:40 PM
Returning to the Moon
YEAH!!!!!!!!!
:)
Posted by: Freedom1 at September 1, 2006 05:16 PM
What happened to the end of science Mark? I think building spaceships and taking them to the moon might take more than a theology degree...
Posted by: Yup at September 1, 2006 05:26 PM
It's not a matter of returning to the Moon: If we really wanted to we could return in 2007; we have the hardware sitting on the shelf. The problem is WHY we're going back to the moon: to set up a permanent outpost rather than bring back a couple hundred pounds of moon rocks.
To do that you have to drop a lot of advance supplies on the Moon and build a bigger, more robust Moon lander to deliver the crew to assemble the outpost. That takes several launches aboard heavy lifters and we don't have that kind of heavy lift capability anymore. Developing the ARES is the real hangup and building enough to lift all those modules will take time.
Posted by: Orion at September 1, 2006 06:56 PM
From a communications standpoint I have to say that the DSN will be strained to communicate with Lunar landers if there are more than a few launches a year. As it stands now our network is quickly becoming overloaded as our ground stations are aging and the maintance time is not keeping up at all.
Here at Goldstone alone half of our equpment is Orange (meaning it "sorta" works right) 50% of the time. We constantly pull in second antennas when we can to cover for antenna faults. Any manned space flight will eventually require an investment in ground communications upgrades. Which I'd love to see but I'm not seeing coming soon. :(
So 8 is an okay number for what we can talk to. My problem is how fast are we going to launch them?
To be completely honest I'm more interested in the opening of comercial launches and space programs and not the federal one. It'll be interesting to see where the future of space flight goes and how my life will be directly effected. :)
Posted by:
Gozer at September 1, 2006 08:04 PM
I am a futurist. I completely believe that man can achieve amazing things and possibly reach his full potential, surpassing planetary confinement. The problem I have with this is that we can't seem to get a handle on what's happening here, on Earth, and now. Until that's solved, I'm afraid space is for dreamers and a collosal waste of resources, desperately needed, again, here and now.
Posted by: 3moreyears at September 1, 2006 09:03 PM
new method for making posts appear, just follow up with a non-post. it seems to work a clear the queue/cache. I'll start using a .
Posted by: 3moreyears at September 1, 2006 09:05 PM
Orion,
Very informative and interesting post. Thanks.
Gozer,
Any manned space flight will eventually require an investment in ground communications upgrades.
Well look at it this way, with NASA's new Moon mission, those upgrades will probably happen sooner than they would without the lunar mission.
To be completely honest I'm more interested in the opening of comercial launches and space programs and not the federal one.
SpaceShipOne is already a reality and a proven success. I think private space exploration advances will flourish now that SS1 has been proven to the world. IIRC, NASA has already contracted with several private firms to design and construct space program items like new, more flexible space suits. Gozer, your life may get very interesting.
:)
Posted by: Freedom1 at September 1, 2006 09:55 PM
3 - do you realize that the computer you are working from, the TV you watch, the cable or satellite system that feeds that TV, the stereo in your home, the microwave oven in the kitchen, can all trace their present forms to the last push to the moon? The need for miniturization was so great that it created whole new industries.
Now look at the medical side, and miniturized surgery, open heart surgery, or orthoscopic surgery also directly traces to the space programs. When I have to have my aortic valve replaced in the next 10-20 years, I will survive because of those advances.
Are you sure a reinvigorated space program is a total waste? I think even more good will come from a privatized space program, but any space program has long justified itself to me.
Posted by: kjstrouble at September 1, 2006 10:03 PM
Aaron,
Can you drop the anti-Bush polemics at least some of the time?
Posted by: Mark Noonan at September 1, 2006 10:08 PM
Gozer,
Didn't realise we had such a communications bottleneck - well, then lets just spend the money to upgrade.
Everyone should always keep in mind that I'm far more of a social conservative than a fiscal conservative...its only money, after all.
Posted by: Mark Noonan at September 1, 2006 10:10 PM
Yup,
You can still go to the Death of Science thread - I suggest you do. You certainly need to actually read what I wrote, and try to follow the whole debate. Its always better to at least attempt to know what you are talking about before you permanently commit yourself to a blog comment.
Posted by: Mark Noonan at September 1, 2006 10:13 PM
Posted by: kjstrouble at September 1, 2006 10:03 PM
Yeah! The space program has revolutioned many fields of human endeavor. With the new Moon mission, I look forward with great anticipation to the future!
:)
Posted by: Freedom1 at September 1, 2006 10:42 PM
Yeah, we've got an interesting chart showing how our data rates have grown over the 40 yeras of the DSN. While our data rates are a lot higher (2.2 Mbps for Spitzer for instance) we're still limited on total station output, number of attennas, and frequences we use. I find it hilarious that MRO is on the same frequence as MER 1 (I believe it's one) and hence it interferes with hearing from the rover. Then again the rover was supposed to be dead by now so... :)
Seriously though currently the DSN is NOT prepared for manned space as we've removed all of our manned space communications ability. We'd be able to recieve all the telemetry from any spacecraft but I'm not sure we'd recieve the entire spectrum of signals from a manned craft without major upgrades. Let alone any Mars shots. *Sighs*
I do hope it creates an interest in upgrading the DSN but I won't be holding my breath. I mean I'm supposed to be working in a paperless office space and working from an outpost on the moon listening to deep space probes. ;) (We've got a funny "This is the DSN" video from like 1978 here that shows plans for an orbiting antenna or moon based station. Oh I love the future visions of the past! :) )
Posted by:
Gozer at September 1, 2006 10:56 PM
Gozer and Orion,
Something that occured to me reading your posts: a big incentive for another push to the moon is that permanent communications facilities on the moon would offer an enormous boost to the range and efficiency of the DSN. And the same goes for detection, but even more so; interferometry-based radio and optical telescope arrays with elements on the moon would move us to a completely new level in astronomy. Like, I get giddy just thinking about it. I just pray that I get to see the day...
Posted by: Nate at September 2, 2006 01:37 AM
Please report any inappropriate comments to abuse (at) blogsforbush (dot) com. Be sure to include the title of the blog entry, the name of the commenter, and the text of the offending comment.
Post a comment
Give Donald Trump and other private companies the rights to build on the moon, and we'll see 'Tranquility Towers' or 'Earthview City' by 2010.
I totally agree with you Mark - we should be doing more to explore space. 50 vehicles would be a good start.
We need to be more ambitious. It appears the Chinese will make an attempt at the moon long before we return there in 2019. I wouldn't bet against them.
But the budget realities are this: we're broke. Very very broke. And getting steadily broker. Consider this: right now, we are spending almost $10 billion/month fighting in Iraq. According to the NY Times article this morning on the award of the new contract to Lockheed, the entire Space Shuttle program going back to the early 1980's cost about $10 billion.
$10 billion for one month of operations in Iraq, or $10 billion for 20+ years of manned space flight? hmmm. yep, I think we have our budget priorities all screwed up.
Hermie - not sure I want a Trump Towers on the moon, but I am sure that privitaztion would be a better route. Maybe giving tax breaks to companies that are working on space vehicles for private use, or planning on private colonies would be a good idea. As well as removing road blocks set up by having the government (NASA) so heavily involved in space.
aarontime - if by almost 10 you mean 8 I guess so - but whats a few billion among friends.
Space exploration brought us tons of industrial and consumer products. But honestly, I'd rather see us start building in Antarctica - at least there's air and water there.
Returning to the Moon
YEAH!!!!!!!!!
:)
What happened to the end of science Mark? I think building spaceships and taking them to the moon might take more than a theology degree...
It's not a matter of returning to the Moon: If we really wanted to we could return in 2007; we have the hardware sitting on the shelf. The problem is WHY we're going back to the moon: to set up a permanent outpost rather than bring back a couple hundred pounds of moon rocks.
To do that you have to drop a lot of advance supplies on the Moon and build a bigger, more robust Moon lander to deliver the crew to assemble the outpost. That takes several launches aboard heavy lifters and we don't have that kind of heavy lift capability anymore. Developing the ARES is the real hangup and building enough to lift all those modules will take time.
From a communications standpoint I have to say that the DSN will be strained to communicate with Lunar landers if there are more than a few launches a year. As it stands now our network is quickly becoming overloaded as our ground stations are aging and the maintance time is not keeping up at all.
Here at Goldstone alone half of our equpment is Orange (meaning it "sorta" works right) 50% of the time. We constantly pull in second antennas when we can to cover for antenna faults. Any manned space flight will eventually require an investment in ground communications upgrades. Which I'd love to see but I'm not seeing coming soon. :(
So 8 is an okay number for what we can talk to. My problem is how fast are we going to launch them?
To be completely honest I'm more interested in the opening of comercial launches and space programs and not the federal one. It'll be interesting to see where the future of space flight goes and how my life will be directly effected. :)
I am a futurist. I completely believe that man can achieve amazing things and possibly reach his full potential, surpassing planetary confinement. The problem I have with this is that we can't seem to get a handle on what's happening here, on Earth, and now. Until that's solved, I'm afraid space is for dreamers and a collosal waste of resources, desperately needed, again, here and now.
new method for making posts appear, just follow up with a non-post. it seems to work a clear the queue/cache. I'll start using a .
Orion,
Very informative and interesting post. Thanks.
Gozer,
Any manned space flight will eventually require an investment in ground communications upgrades.
Well look at it this way, with NASA's new Moon mission, those upgrades will probably happen sooner than they would without the lunar mission.
To be completely honest I'm more interested in the opening of comercial launches and space programs and not the federal one.
SpaceShipOne is already a reality and a proven success. I think private space exploration advances will flourish now that SS1 has been proven to the world. IIRC, NASA has already contracted with several private firms to design and construct space program items like new, more flexible space suits. Gozer, your life may get very interesting.
:)
3 - do you realize that the computer you are working from, the TV you watch, the cable or satellite system that feeds that TV, the stereo in your home, the microwave oven in the kitchen, can all trace their present forms to the last push to the moon? The need for miniturization was so great that it created whole new industries.
Now look at the medical side, and miniturized surgery, open heart surgery, or orthoscopic surgery also directly traces to the space programs. When I have to have my aortic valve replaced in the next 10-20 years, I will survive because of those advances.
Are you sure a reinvigorated space program is a total waste? I think even more good will come from a privatized space program, but any space program has long justified itself to me.
Aaron,
Can you drop the anti-Bush polemics at least some of the time?
Gozer,
Didn't realise we had such a communications bottleneck - well, then lets just spend the money to upgrade.
Everyone should always keep in mind that I'm far more of a social conservative than a fiscal conservative...its only money, after all.
Yup,
You can still go to the Death of Science thread - I suggest you do. You certainly need to actually read what I wrote, and try to follow the whole debate. Its always better to at least attempt to know what you are talking about before you permanently commit yourself to a blog comment.
Posted by: kjstrouble at September 1, 2006 10:03 PM
Yeah! The space program has revolutioned many fields of human endeavor. With the new Moon mission, I look forward with great anticipation to the future!
:)
Yeah, we've got an interesting chart showing how our data rates have grown over the 40 yeras of the DSN. While our data rates are a lot higher (2.2 Mbps for Spitzer for instance) we're still limited on total station output, number of attennas, and frequences we use. I find it hilarious that MRO is on the same frequence as MER 1 (I believe it's one) and hence it interferes with hearing from the rover. Then again the rover was supposed to be dead by now so... :)
Seriously though currently the DSN is NOT prepared for manned space as we've removed all of our manned space communications ability. We'd be able to recieve all the telemetry from any spacecraft but I'm not sure we'd recieve the entire spectrum of signals from a manned craft without major upgrades. Let alone any Mars shots. *Sighs*
I do hope it creates an interest in upgrading the DSN but I won't be holding my breath. I mean I'm supposed to be working in a paperless office space and working from an outpost on the moon listening to deep space probes. ;) (We've got a funny "This is the DSN" video from like 1978 here that shows plans for an orbiting antenna or moon based station. Oh I love the future visions of the past! :) )
Gozer and Orion,
Something that occured to me reading your posts: a big incentive for another push to the moon is that permanent communications facilities on the moon would offer an enormous boost to the range and efficiency of the DSN. And the same goes for detection, but even more so; interferometry-based radio and optical telescope arrays with elements on the moon would move us to a completely new level in astronomy. Like, I get giddy just thinking about it. I just pray that I get to see the day...