Where Do We Go Next In Space?
Subcommittee Examines Next Steps for U.S. Human Space Exploration
“A human mission to Mars is not attainable without significant scientific, technological, and operational progress and preparation. One or more interim destinations have often been suggested as the logical path for developing and demonstrating those capabilities needed in advance of the more distant and risky venture of sending humans to Mars. An interim destination could also serve as an important focal point and organizing mechanism for the human exploration program, as well as providing a vision and inspiring goal for the nation’s future in space. Over past Administrations and the current Administration, the goal for an interim destination has changed.”
Witnesses Debate Strategic Stepping Stones to Mars
“There are several compelling reasons for using the Moon as a training ground to prepare for more complex missions. Landing on the Moon would develop technical capabilities for landing on and launching from a large celestial body, something NASA has not done for more than four decades. Establishing a semi-permanent or permanent presence on the Moon would give astronauts an opportunity to work and live in an environment radically different from Earth.”
Prepared statements: Witnesses: Douglas Cooke, Steven Squyres, Paul Spudis, Louis Friedman
Prepared statements: members: Rep. Steven Palazzo,
Rep. Lamar Smith, Rep. Donna Edwards, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnsons
The consistency I see in all of these is that the next step, beyond using ISS to develop the required technologies, is the freedom to operate in cis-lunar space, and with cautions about relying on expensive and infrequent flights of Orion and SLS. They give varying rationales-Spudis and the moon, Cooke and living and working on the moon preparing for future explorations. Friedman and asteroids and eventual Mars missions, but the next step seems pretty clear. Orion is not an answer.
I disagree. SLS & Orion will be enabling technologies for BEO exploration. I still believe the when landing on Mars is achieved; it will be quite an endeavor for the human race to accomplish, And will be the end product of a collaboration by several countries. I believe that it will be far more difficult than some on this website believe. The moon is a reasonable intermediate goal and testbed to develop the technology and operational experience we need to tackle something this daunting. The SLS and its heavy lift capability will be required. many here see dozens or perhaps hundreds of Dragon flights, with orbital refueling stations, and garages were assembly is performed. That may well happen, but I and everyone reading this website will all be safely on the dark side of the grass before that occurs. I believe most likely the hardware will be developed mainly on earth, by people working in shirtsleeves not spacesuits; and will be launched in large subassemblies to high Earth orbit and assembled there with his little sweat equity as possible. To make the mission feasible we may need to have nuclear thermal propulsion, so we better get cracking and spend a little money. We can kill small aliquots of committed, optimistic people on the cheap. Success is probably going to cost the country something to achieve. Did you ever wonder how many people drowned like rats before Isabella funded Columbus appropriately? And just think he could breathe the air, treat the water, and all he had to worry about was hurricanes.
I think you are missing the point about SLS, Orion, the (so called) need for HLLV and commenters on NW. What I have seen from the majority of people critical of SLS and Orion is the fact that there are cheaper options available and that these two programs (technically one) cost way to much for the value that they offer in terms of cost per pound to orbit and/or in their capabilities to take men to BEO destinations.
In other words NASA should focus on in-space craft and technologies, get out of the lift vehicle business and leave it to private entities to compete for (key word here being compete). If NASA has determined that it needs a new HLLV to achieve its BEO missions than it should use the same milestone contracting methods as they do for COTS and CCDev vice the horrible cost plus contract they are currently using that favors congresscritters sacred cows in the form of ULA, ATK, et al.
(not to mention the space centers in their districts).
This is especially true when SLS and Orion are eating other important programs funds.
As my book “Human Missions to Mars” Springer-Verlag 2007 shows in 500+ pages, that a human mission to Mars does “require significant technical, scientific and operational progress and preparation” and the claims of these speakers are grossly optimistic by a huge margin. The cost and time required to develop these capabilities is enormous. You should not believe the claims of those who will tend to benefit from their claims. Only an outside, independent observer can view the situation without bias. If you want the real facts get my book from amazon.com. I spent quite a few years studying and modeling human missions to Mars when I was at JPL. I tell the truth. Donald Rapp
The focus on launch vehicles (LVs) is only a small part of
the big picture. LVs are an important aspect of sending humans to Mars, but the bigger issue is what initial mass must be delivered to LEO (IMLEO)? This dictates how many LVs are needed. My book models this for various assumptions regarding propulsion and aero entry systems. An optimistic appraisal is that IMLEO ~ 1,500 metric tons. This might be a lower limit. Equally important are issues such as providing life support consumables, 100% reliable recycling systems, radiation effects and shielding, coping with microgravity, abort options and mission safety, habitats, and of greatest importance: aero assisted entry, descent and landing. Options for use of ISRU have potential to provide benefits but require costly long-term prospecting for in situ near-surface water. As I show in my book, there are major differences between lunar and Mars missions, and the contrary to opinions voiced by the establishment, the Moon does not provide a very good test bed for Mars mission technology. I don’t expect the first human landing on Mars before 1980.