http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9355479

Quote :

"WASHINGTON - 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 U.S. 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 (5.5-meter) 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. © 2005 Space.com. All rights reserved. More from Space.com."

9/16/2005 2:43:00 AM

That's awesome news for us aerospace majors.

9/16/2005 7:27:29 AM

That's awesome news for us aeronautical majors.

9/16/2005 8:06:01 AM

That's awesome news for us geoscience majors.

9/16/2005 9:49:03 AM

That's awesome news for us computer scientists.

9/16/2005 10:19:33 AM

That's awesome news for us NASA contractors.

9/16/2005 10:30:16 AM

That's awesome news for us mechanical majors

[Edited on September 16, 2005 at 10:33 AM. Reason : .]

9/16/2005 10:33:21 AM

Fuck the moon.

MARS, BITCHES.

9/16/2005 10:36:04 AM

That's awesome news for us Electrical Engineers.

9/16/2005 10:37:46 AM

That's awesome news for us Haliburt.......

9/16/2005 11:27:51 AM

That's awesome news for those PRT majors

9/16/2005 12:29:08 PM

2018 sounds possible because we say fuck ISS round herre.

9/16/2005 12:42:52 PM

when they say 2018, they mean 2033

9/16/2005 12:46:30 PM

^actually, not this time. Were dumping the shuttle as quickly as possible and we're already designing the new ish. The design might be done by next year.

9/16/2005 12:57:37 PM

Is that the new shuttle?

9/16/2005 1:01:30 PM

^dont think so...

Theyre gonna have a human system like Apollo (ie. small capsule) and a heavy lifter (ie. like shuttle)

also, any credible info can be found on www.nasawatch.com

9/16/2005 1:08:06 PM

so if we really made it to the moon the first time, why would it take this long to do it again? and why would it be such a big deal?

9/16/2005 4:08:25 PM

cuz we're trying to put people ther for extended periods ot time and use it to refuel on the way to Mars and other rocks.

We're gonna have a mofoing moon base yo! With a bitching laser.

9/16/2005 4:29:51 PM

can we start dumping trash up there

9/16/2005 4:54:43 PM

^what, like minorities....

I fucking hope we can start dumping out trash somewhere

9/16/2005 5:06:35 PM

what a fucking waste

9/16/2005 9:30:26 PM

Quote :

" what a fucking waste"

The point of dumping taxpayers' dollars into space research is you keep your edge, technologically speaking, so long as you make the right bets. NASA's pioneering research in the Apollo era alone led to mountains of beneficial and profitable technology, both in the science and medical arenas. see here for more:http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html

Considering our budget http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2056.html is around 2.3 trillion dollars, NASA getting around 16 billion per year, while the military gets 400 billion, I think some perspective is necessary.

Plus, let's not forget our neighbors the Chinese, Japanese, European Union, and Russians all have advanced space research programs (though none have quite the budget of NASA). Any time you have a nation actively pursuing inspiring, pioneering research you get a huge, young, highly educated workforce (we did due to Apollo, and to an extent due to Shuttle). America had no current vision for space exploration, and the president came up with one. I don't think it's as particularly engaging as say, going to the moon the first time, but it counts for something.

Seriously we're gonna get pwnd by the Chinese if we don't stay in the game

9/18/2005 11:08:49 PM

Quote :

"can we start dumping trash up there"

the liberals are too scared of the shuttle blowing up on the way up

9/18/2005 11:10:50 PM

^

9/18/2005 11:15:45 PM

Back in the Space Race of the '60's, NASA accounted for >4% of the national budget. Now NASA is well below 1%.
Quitcherbitchin.

9/18/2005 11:18:40 PM

2018 means it will never happen. Politics will get to it. The chinese will beat us there and that will light some fire under some asses.

9/18/2005 11:26:44 PM

We need Burt Rutan to fasttrack this thing.

9/18/2005 11:47:20 PM

Red Rocks!

9/18/2005 11:54:43 PM

i was just thinking how cool it would be to be ripped on the moon. imagine smokin looking right at earth. that would be a trip

9/19/2005 1:46:04 AM

Quote :

"^dont think so... Theyre gonna have a human system like Apollo (ie. small capsule) and a heavy lifter (ie. like shuttle) also, any credible info can be found on http://www.nasawatch.com "

I was actually joking. That was the design they were working on that was supposed to be the new shuttle, post 2000. It didn't meet any of its goals though (cheaply reusable, safe), and was scrapped. I would bet millions were dumped in to its design though. NASA needs to get its smurf together, was my point, because they were tasked with designing a new shuttle before and failed.

9/19/2005 1:55:01 AM

got some pics of the possible new delivery vehicle.

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=17836

9/19/2005 1:39:43 PM

where do i sign up to go?

9/19/2005 1:47:37 PM

they came out with the plan today and for all non-NASA folks, the design looks good. Its going to look like Apollo with 21 century technology. Its what everyone round here expected. "Strap some SRBs (solid rocket boosters) to thatsumbitch and put it up there." Its prett cheap and very safe. ie. no foam, tiles are protected because they are inside the rocket and better aerodynaminics.

Also, if you think its going to cost more money its not. theyre going to keep the same budget and are just going to shift money from other departments to get this thing running.

I think Griffin should be able to get this thing done by 2018 because he smart and he understands what NASAs role is for America and knows how to do it.

that is all

9/19/2005 1:53:39 PM