"In SPD-1 NASA was directed to develop a lunar exploration plan – after 15 months later we do not have a plan. @JimBridenstine told me 15 min ago that we now have a plan to go back to the Moon" @VP
"Its time for the next giant leap. To return Americans to the surface of the Moon by any means necessary. To build a permanent presence on the Moon and send humans to Mars" @VP
Line read by @JimBridenstine "Anything that is not mandatory is a distraction" – he said "I think I am going to post that on the @NASA website and email it to the NASA workforce."
1h Given that @NASA_MSFC and @BoeingSpace can only meet a 2020 EM-1 deadline by skipping a lot of required tests and Pence's human landing goal of 2024/2025 by utterly changing their current plans the private sector now has an unparalleled opportunity to show what they can do.
Now we hear the standard reason what Gateway is needed – go to the entire moon, etc etc. Hopefully @JimBridenstine will run a study for easier ways to get to the Moon sooner using commercial assets.
Having the WH set the 5 year goal is excellent. It focuses everyone from on high. Holding contractors to task or finding new ones is what is called for in all areas but certainly is needed for humans on the Moon. 1/n
When I see a firm, hard decision to change something that has been sacrosanct for decades then I will accept that WH means it. If you want people to take this seriously a head needs to roll somewhere. Otherwise its just going to be seen as business as usual. 2/n
If the Trump White House wants this to happen, they will need to completely cut NASA out of this mission. I believe if may be possible, but the White House will have to put a lot of trust in Space X.
A good move – but it must be fully funded. If NASA can’t get SLS ready – and it probably won’t be able to – then the mission has to fly on commercial launch vehicles. I think that not being able to deliver on this goal would be a huge blow to NASA’s image. But five years is very short – the US still doesn’t have a lander, its Orion spacecraft is yet to be properly tested, and no SLS… its half the timeline of ‘we choose to go to the Moon’ to ‘that’s one small step for man’.
If Marshall doesn’t win in this race with SpaceX it will be turned into a back water like Langley was after Johnson was created. So this is Marshall chance to show they deserve the praise they received yesterday. It’s time for the engineers to push the bureaucrats out of the way and start building rockets.
The rest of Congress will turn on the Alabama delegation when they sense blood in the water. None want to be seen as supporting a failed venture that cost the taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.
It’s a matter of degree. Congressmen like Sen. Shelby will push for what is best for their constituents, and Sen. Shelby is a position to push fairly hard. But other congressmen will push back over something which makes them look bad and could cost them votes. If SLS looks bad enough to enough voters, Congress won’t support it. The question is whether anything NASA does could ever get the required level of bad press, not what would happen if it did.
Personally, I can’t see it happening on its own. NASA and the space industry just don’t have that sort of public interest. But I could see it if someone (e.g. the President or a high-profile congressman) made a big deal about government spending and pork, and used SLS as the poster child example. SLS is getting to the point where that might happen.
SLS et al just isn’t on the general public’s radar screen. Even if the Administration chose to make a big deal about its massive overruns and schedule delays, there are so many other examples of mismanagement no one would really care.
Making a big speech without a concomitant big budget commitment just sounds like all of the prior post-Apollo “go to the Moon” swing and miss attempts. If this really is a serious commitment, where’s the plan? Why isn’t it in the recently released budget that’s not even out long enough for the ink to dry?
Reliable human lunar landers will be VERY expensive, no matter who builds them.
No, SLS isn’t on the public’s radar screen. I was considering things which could put it there. Mr. Trump could make a big deal about “draining the swamp”. Rep. Oscasio Cortez could make a big deal about corporate lobbying and elected officials in bed with big companies. In that case, whoever was making a big deal about it would need a clear, specific example to point to. The space program isn’t going to get that level of attention on its own. But, as that example of a larger problem, it might be become one. That’s where SLS could run into trouble. It’s at the point where it could be used as an example of a larger problem, the space program has been used as a political football, the space program has gotten public attention when presented in the right context, and, unlike military spending debacles, it doesn’t have a national security fig leaf to provoke counterargument. I think that makes an out of control NASA program an easy target for a politician looking for an example of a bigger problem.
As far as the cost of a lunar lander, I agree that it won’t be cheap. But the Apollo LEM was not a huge fraction of the whole Apollo program. And a privately developed lander could be even less expensive. NASA officials have said that the overall cost of developing the Falcon 9 was an order of magnitude less that what it would have cost NASA to develop a similar rocket internally. The same ratio could easily apply to developing a lunar lander.
Yep, and it will be an easy sell when President Trump is able to point to the SpaceX Starship carrying more passengers in flight than NASA has astronauts on one hand, and on the other is the Pork Machine’s Orion, a spam can with four astronauts aboard that has to be fished out of the ocean by the U.S. Navy. I expect you will see hearings where the NASA folk will be roasted by the Congress Critters looking to save their reputations. Nothing is more dangerous than a Congress Critter looking to save face with the voters.
I have no reason to think this is any more likely than any administration since 1972 which always promises great things 5 to 20 years out. There are no details and no money. I would love to be wrong. An indication that there might be hope is if Space X is prominently featured. If it is NASA and the usual suspects then nothing will happen.
Sell it to the democrats by saying do it the way President Obama did commercial crew. FIXED PRICE. milestone based. SAA’s rather than FAR. The company has to put their own skin in game and pay for the milestones themselves and do not get paid until it is completed on THEIR dime.
They will never use the successful COTS model that was developed under the Bush Administration. The CCP version that was developed under the Obama Administration would not be flexible enough because it allows NASA to return to their old ways of contractor micromanagement, witness how SpaceX is still waiting on NASA approval to do its abort test flight. And the continued delays that plague the Boeing’s CST-100 System.
It did allow for company ownership and NASA did not get to dictate down to the nut and screw… I am talking about how to try SELL it. You are not going to sell it to democrats by attaching it to any republican. IMO
Remember, it has to make it through the Senate as well, and be signed by the President. You aren’t going to achieve that by claiming a Democratic invented it.
I won’t believe it until they get funding allocated for a crewed lander that can dock with Orion. It certainly doesn’t seem plausible now, since they’re also trying to force it through the Lunar Orbital Gateway.
Yeah, well, the White House says a lot of things. The only way NASA might land someone on the Moon within five years is if SpaceX can sell them tickets.
Apollo 8 Redux is already available to SpaceX. I have not looked at any numbers, but my gut tells me,Falcon Heavy can send Crew Dragon around the Moon. Right? May need a Service Module and definitely, a Lander to complete the trip. Too bad Mr Musk does not seem interested in the Moon.
He is, he is just not interested in sending only two astronauts at a time. The Starship he is building will be able to transport 50 or more per flight to the lunar surface.
Agreed. I am following that new vehicle as much as I can. I just feel like it could be done within months, if they (SX) used what they already have flying. FH with Crew Dragon. Granted, a moon landing such as this would be a stunt, but Musk is no stranger to hyped up public presentations… To clarify, this would be a non-crewed, Crew Dragon.
This is significant in several fronts… Get the popcorn ready.
Just read the article about this on Ars Technica and it sounds like the cat is still chasing it’s tail.
https://arstechnica.com/sci…
I think Bridenstine will and has adjusted. Trump can’t be more clear.
If the Trump White House wants this to happen, they will need to completely cut NASA out of this mission. I believe if may be possible, but the White House will have to put a lot of trust in Space X.
A good move – but it must be fully funded. If NASA can’t get SLS ready – and it probably won’t be able to – then the mission has to fly on commercial launch vehicles. I think that not being able to deliver on this goal would be a huge blow to NASA’s image. But five years is very short – the US still doesn’t have a lander, its Orion spacecraft is yet to be properly tested, and no SLS… its half the timeline of ‘we choose to go to the Moon’ to ‘that’s one small step for man’.
Other than they’ve already been working on it for 8 years (14 years if you include the Constellation program).
If Marshall doesn’t win in this race with SpaceX it will be turned into a back water like Langley was after Johnson was created. So this is Marshall chance to show they deserve the praise they received yesterday. It’s time for the engineers to push the bureaucrats out of the way and start building rockets.
Hard to see that happening given Congressional politics.
The rest of Congress will turn on the Alabama delegation when they sense blood in the water. None want to be seen as supporting a failed venture that cost the taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.
Elephants can fly, too.
Never underestimate Richard Shelby, Ted Cruz, etc. Too much pork at stake for them not to act in self-interest.
It’s a matter of degree. Congressmen like Sen. Shelby will push for what is best for their constituents, and Sen. Shelby is a position to push fairly hard. But other congressmen will push back over something which makes them look bad and could cost them votes. If SLS looks bad enough to enough voters, Congress won’t support it. The question is whether anything NASA does could ever get the required level of bad press, not what would happen if it did.
Personally, I can’t see it happening on its own. NASA and the space industry just don’t have that sort of public interest. But I could see it if someone (e.g. the President or a high-profile congressman) made a big deal about government spending and pork, and used SLS as the poster child example. SLS is getting to the point where that might happen.
SLS et al just isn’t on the general public’s radar screen. Even if the Administration chose to make a big deal about its massive overruns and schedule delays, there are so many other examples of mismanagement no one would really care.
Making a big speech without a concomitant big budget commitment just sounds like all of the prior post-Apollo “go to the Moon” swing and miss attempts. If this really is a serious commitment, where’s the plan? Why isn’t it in the recently released budget that’s not even out long enough for the ink to dry?
Reliable human lunar landers will be VERY expensive, no matter who builds them.
No, SLS isn’t on the public’s radar screen. I was considering things which could put it there. Mr. Trump could make a big deal about “draining the swamp”. Rep. Oscasio Cortez could make a big deal about corporate lobbying and elected officials in bed with big companies. In that case, whoever was making a big deal about it would need a clear, specific example to point to. The space program isn’t going to get that level of attention on its own. But, as that example of a larger problem, it might be become one. That’s where SLS could run into trouble. It’s at the point where it could be used as an example of a larger problem, the space program has been used as a political football, the space program has gotten public attention when presented in the right context, and, unlike military spending debacles, it doesn’t have a national security fig leaf to provoke counterargument. I think that makes an out of control NASA program an easy target for a politician looking for an example of a bigger problem.
As far as the cost of a lunar lander, I agree that it won’t be cheap. But the Apollo LEM was not a huge fraction of the whole Apollo program. And a privately developed lander could be even less expensive. NASA officials have said that the overall cost of developing the Falcon 9 was an order of magnitude less that what it would have cost NASA to develop a similar rocket internally. The same ratio could easily apply to developing a lunar lander.
Yep, and it will be an easy sell when President Trump is able to point to the SpaceX Starship carrying more passengers in flight than NASA has astronauts on one hand, and on the other is the Pork Machine’s Orion, a spam can with four astronauts aboard that has to be fished out of the ocean by the U.S. Navy. I expect you will see hearings where the NASA folk will be roasted by the Congress Critters looking to save their reputations. Nothing is more dangerous than a Congress Critter looking to save face with the voters.
I have no reason to think this is any more likely than any administration since 1972 which always promises great things 5 to 20 years out. There are no details and no money. I would love to be wrong. An indication that there might be hope is if Space X is prominently featured. If it is NASA and the usual suspects then nothing will happen.
Sell it to the democrats by saying do it the way President Obama did commercial crew. FIXED PRICE. milestone based. SAA’s rather than FAR. The company has to put their own skin in game and pay for the milestones themselves and do not get paid until it is completed on THEIR dime.
They will never use the successful COTS model that was developed under the Bush Administration. The CCP version that was developed under the Obama Administration would not be flexible enough because it allows NASA to return to their old ways of contractor micromanagement, witness how SpaceX is still waiting on NASA approval to do its abort test flight. And the continued delays that plague the Boeing’s CST-100 System.
It did allow for company ownership and NASA did not get to dictate down to the nut and screw… I am talking about how to try SELL it. You are not going to sell it to democrats by attaching it to any republican. IMO
Remember, it has to make it through the Senate as well, and be signed by the President. You aren’t going to achieve that by claiming a Democratic invented it.
I won’t believe it until they get funding allocated for a crewed lander that can dock with Orion. It certainly doesn’t seem plausible now, since they’re also trying to force it through the Lunar Orbital Gateway.
They’ll drop the Gateway eventually. It was just a place for SLS to go in lieu of having a lander.
Yeah, well, the White House says a lot of things. The only way NASA might land someone on the Moon within five years is if SpaceX can sell them tickets.
Apollo 8 Redux is already available to SpaceX. I have not looked at any numbers, but my gut tells me,Falcon Heavy can send Crew Dragon around the Moon. Right? May need a Service Module and definitely, a Lander to complete the trip. Too bad Mr Musk does not seem interested in the Moon.
He is, he is just not interested in sending only two astronauts at a time. The Starship he is building will be able to transport 50 or more per flight to the lunar surface.
Agreed. I am following that new vehicle as much as I can. I just feel like it could be done within months, if they (SX) used what they already have flying. FH with Crew Dragon. Granted, a moon landing such as this would be a stunt, but Musk is no stranger to hyped up public presentations…
To clarify, this would be a non-crewed, Crew Dragon.