It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NASA lays out $28 billion plan to return astronauts to the moon in 2024

page: 1
21
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:02 PM
link   
This is some pretty cool news, ATS!

NASA aims to land Astronauts on the Moon for the first time since 1972 under the Artemis program. There's also a plan to have the first female astronaut on board. Obviously, 2024 is too soon to make use of the Gateway station which is supposed to be in orbit around the moon to serve as a way station for trips to the Moon or for deep space; however Nasa wants to use other aspects of the Artemis program to get Astronauts back to the Moon including the Orion capsule of the SLS system.

Everything rests on whether congress approves funding for Nasa in the realm of $3.2 billion. According to Bridenstein:


“We need that $3.2 billion for the Human Landing System,” Bridenstine said. “I think that if we can have that done before Christmas, we’re still on track for a 2024 moon landing.”




NASA officials released a nearly five-year, $28 billion plan Monday to return astronauts to the surface of the moon before the end of 2024, but the agency’s administrator said the “aggressive” timeline set by the Trump administration last year hinges on Congress approving $3.2 billion in the next few months to kick-start development of new human-rated lunar landers.

The plan unveiled Monday contained few new details not previously disclosed by NASA. It assumes crews will launch on NASA’s Space Launch System heavy-lift rocket, fly to the moon’s vicinity on an Orion capsule, then transfer into a commercially-developed lunar lander to ferry the astronauts to and from the lunar surface.

NASA released a new overview document Monday describing the agency’s approach to landing astronauts on the moon for the first time since the Apollo 17 mission in December 1972. The program, named Artemis, encompasses the SLS, Orion, Human Landing Systems, and the Gateway, a human-tended platform in lunar orbit that will eventually serve as a staging point for missions to the moon.

“NASA has all the key systems and contracts in place to ensure that we are meeting the president’s ambitious goal to return American astronauts to the moon for the first time since 1972,” said NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine.

The Trump administration last year directed NASA to land the first woman and the next man on the moon by the end of 2024, moving up the space agency’s previous moon landing schedule by four years.

Bridenstine acknowledged the challenge of landing astronauts on the moon in four years. Three companies — Blue Origin, Dynetics and SpaceX — are developing human-rated lunar landers for NASA, which plans next year to select one or two of the lander teams to continue work on their spacecraft.

“There’s a number of different risks when you deal with human spaceflight,” Bridenstine said. “NASA is really really good at dealing with the technical risks.”

“The challenge that we have is the political risk — the programs that go too long, that cost too much, and that end up getting cast out later in the development program,” Bridenstine said, adding that programs that develop over longer schedules often end up with higher overall costs. “So to save money, and to reduce political risk, we want to go fast … 2024 is an aggressive timeline. Is it possible? Yes. Does everything have to go right? Yes.”


Whats does ATS think? This is staring to sound exciting! New rockest/ landers, new Gateway space station, new suits, and a new Artemis base camp on the South pole of the Moon!

What says ATS?

spaceflightnow.com...




posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Again I ask why. We know what's there, nothing. There's nothing to be gained unless someone finds a way to harvest the what was it, O3 or H3 or something like that? Use that 28 billion to advance our health care along with a law to mandate price negotiations with providers and pharma. Besides, that will easily double or triple by 2024 because of wasteful government spending. Black ops. Covert programs.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Good news,
Although that is a very ambitious timeline IMO.
Just over 4 years away.

I hope it all works out and we get some sweet HD headcam footage of the lunar surface.

About time humans went back,hopefully this round we will stay.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:23 PM
link   
If the President ask for the funding, congress will never grant it. I believe this one will go down the tubes.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: HalWesten
Again I ask why. We know what's there, nothing. There's nothing to be gained unless someone finds a way to harvest the what was it, O3 or H3 or something like that? Use that 28 billion to advance our health care along with a law to mandate price negotiations with providers and pharma. Besides, that will easily double or triple by 2024 because of wasteful government spending. Black ops. Covert programs.


No advantages? Are you serious?

1 lunar surface can be used making solar panels. You could even create huge solar farms and send energy directy back to earth.

2 moon base platform for further expansion. You could build entire ships on the moon great place to launch rockets from as well as provide fuel. You can make oxygen from moon rocks they contain about 20 percent oxygen. then of course there is Helium-3, Not to mention other precious metals as well.

Then there is the factor we need to test things for a mission to mars. The moon would be perfect to work out all the bugs closer to home.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I think NASA needs to do this, if for nothing else, to maintain its place at the top of the Space exploration race. As I understand it, Japan and China are both making gains in this area and the private sector is making gains. So, NASA had better do something.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

I think we should go back to the moon, but always make sure you go when the moon is full, you stand a better chance of landing there.




posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: lostbook

I think we should go back to the moon, but always make sure you go when the moon is full, you stand a better chance of landing there.



You were making a joke i get it but the irony is your right. They actually try to time landings on full moons. You dont want to try to land in ttal darkness thats just asking for trouble, Then there is trying to explore but not being able to see thing as well. Because the moon has no atmoshere it will get really dark



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nickn3
If the President ask for the funding, congress will never grant it. I believe this one will go down the tubes.

They always do! The cold, hard facts of the Budget wash a lot of moon dust out of people's eyes.

But hey, after giving away a Trillion Dollars this year, maybe they'll just crank up the press again and pay for it with funny money.
edit on 22-9-2020 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:52 PM
link   
"On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy announced before a special joint session of Congress the dramatic and ambitious goal of sending an American safely to the Moon before the end of the decade."

"The decision involved much consideration before making it public, as well as enormous human efforts and expenditures to make what became Project Apollo a reality by 1969. "

history.nasa.gov...

We have already been to the moon many times ending with Apollo 17. So clearly we already have solved many problems that had no answers 'before' Apollo 11 landed in 1969.

Today's technology is so much more advanced, especially with computers; add that to our previous knowledge gained in all the Apollo landings on the moon and I see no reason why we cannot do it again by 2024 if funds are made available.

I remember our cartographic and photogrammetry groups worked 24 hour shifts to get our part done in the 'Lunar Landing Program'. We produced a lot of specialized maps besides the landing zones and alternate landing zoness. Landing on the Moon by 2024 can be done if the will, focus, and funds are available.

Personally, since I've see the Moon under high powered optics while mapping and doing the measurements and analysis of features, including the back side; however I am far more interested in a Mars landing mission. Setting up logistics to go to Mars from the Moon could be the first real step in realizing that future feat.








a reply to: lostbook


edit on 22-9-2020 by lunarcartographer because: add

edit on 22-9-2020 by lunarcartographer because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: HalWesten
Again I ask why. We know what's there, nothing. There's nothing to be gained unless someone finds a way to harvest the what was it, O3 or H3 or something like that? Use that 28 billion to advance our health care along with a law to mandate price negotiations with providers and pharma. Besides, that will easily double or triple by 2024 because of wasteful government spending. Black ops. Covert programs.


No advantages? Are you serious?

1 lunar surface can be used making solar panels. You could even create huge solar farms and send energy directy back to earth.

2 moon base platform for further expansion. You could build entire ships on the moon great place to launch rockets from as well as provide fuel. You can make oxygen from moon rocks they contain about 20 percent oxygen. then of course there is Helium-3, Not to mention other precious metals as well.

Then there is the factor we need to test things for a mission to mars. The moon would be perfect to work out all the bugs closer to home.

Moon base nonsense. They'll never be able to beat the dust problem, which consists of microscopic, sharper than razor-sharp shards of glass that will infiltrate and damage everything, including robots, vehicles and human lungs. And there's NO WAY you could clean and wash enough to get it all off, especially in a place where you have to bring all of your own water.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Maybe I've been spoiled by too much Star Trek and other space movies. But shouldn't we have landed a human on another planet by now?



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Maybe I've been spoiled by too much Star Trek and other space movies. But shouldn't we have landed a human on another planet by now?

It's a lot easier to write about it than to actually do it. That's why it's called science fiction.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr
No one thinks out of that box because it hasn't been supported by a source or agency yet.

I'm afraid of the future and any breakthroughs that'll be stonewalled because it just sounds too crazy and their science community won't profit off it.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: HalWesten
Again I ask why. We know what's there, nothing. There's nothing to be gained unless someone finds a way to harvest the what was it, O3 or H3 or something like that? Use that 28 billion to advance our health care along with a law to mandate price negotiations with providers and pharma. Besides, that will easily double or triple by 2024 because of wasteful government spending. Black ops. Covert programs.


No advantages? Are you serious?

1 lunar surface can be used making solar panels. You could even create huge solar farms and send energy directy back to earth.

2 moon base platform for further expansion. You could build entire ships on the moon great place to launch rockets from as well as provide fuel. You can make oxygen from moon rocks they contain about 20 percent oxygen. then of course there is Helium-3, Not to mention other precious metals as well.

Then there is the factor we need to test things for a mission to mars. The moon would be perfect to work out all the bugs closer to home.

Moon base nonsense. They'll never be able to beat the dust problem, which consists of microscopic, sharper than razor-sharp shards of glass that will infiltrate and damage everything, including robots, vehicles and human lungs. And there's NO WAY you could clean and wash enough to get it all off, especially in a place where you have to bring all of your own water.


We have to try because thats exact what China and Russia are going to do. The razor sharp sand may be a long term issue among hundreds or thousands of obstacles, but we have to try and find out. We need to see if there is a way to extract water and if there is a way to make fuel, theoretically both are possible, only way we know is by going back and staying as long as possible



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: lostbook

I think we should go back to the moon, but always make sure you go when the moon is full, you stand a better chance of landing there.



Quoted for laughs! We wanna make sure the Moon is full, otherwise, the rocket might miss it..! Lol!



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Carbon fiber, carbon plates, synthetic diamonds, carbon filters, and other advance materials could solve some of those problems, considering the hardness of carbon and it's filtering capability. Science advances solving problems like these.

a reply to: Blue Shift



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: HalWesten
Again I ask why. We know what's there, nothing. There's nothing to be gained unless someone finds a way to harvest the what was it, O3 or H3 or something like that? Use that 28 billion to advance our health care along with a law to mandate price negotiations with providers and pharma. Besides, that will easily double or triple by 2024 because of wasteful government spending. Black ops. Covert programs.


No advantages? Are you serious?

1 lunar surface can be used making solar panels. You could even create huge solar farms and send energy directy back to earth.

2 moon base platform for further expansion. You could build entire ships on the moon great place to launch rockets from as well as provide fuel. You can make oxygen from moon rocks they contain about 20 percent oxygen. then of course there is Helium-3, Not to mention other precious metals as well.

Then there is the factor we need to test things for a mission to mars. The moon would be perfect to work out all the bugs closer to home.


Do you hear what you're saying? There's no reason to go there when we have so many issues to deal with here, now. Forget Mars, and the cost to harvest those metals and transport them back to earth? Wow, how about re-thinking how we do things here instead where they will benefit more people? Sorry, you aren't going to change my mind about this, the only ones that will benefit are the large corporations building these rockets and fuels.



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 07:19 PM
link   
To solve the Moon dust problem entering an enclosure or facility, use a fan directed air flow path through an electrostatic filter, in the most outer air lock enclosure.
edit on 22-9-2020 by lunarcartographer because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2020 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: HalWesten

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: HalWesten
Again I ask why. We know what's there, nothing. There's nothing to be gained unless someone finds a way to harvest the what was it, O3 or H3 or something like that? Use that 28 billion to advance our health care along with a law to mandate price negotiations with providers and pharma. Besides, that will easily double or triple by 2024 because of wasteful government spending. Black ops. Covert programs.


No advantages? Are you serious?

1 lunar surface can be used making solar panels. You could even create huge solar farms and send energy directy back to earth.

2 moon base platform for further expansion. You could build entire ships on the moon great place to launch rockets from as well as provide fuel. You can make oxygen from moon rocks they contain about 20 percent oxygen. then of course there is Helium-3, Not to mention other precious metals as well.

Then there is the factor we need to test things for a mission to mars. The moon would be perfect to work out all the bugs closer to home.


Do you hear what you're saying? There's no reason to go there when we have so many issues to deal with here, now. Forget Mars, and the cost to harvest those metals and transport them back to earth? Wow, how about re-thinking how we do things here instead where they will benefit more people? Sorry, you aren't going to change my mind about this, the only ones that will benefit are the large corporations building these rockets and fuels.



It creates new jobs here on earth, where do you the the 28 billion will be spent? 17,000 people are employed at NASA alone. Look at the bloated bureaucracy, IRS for example NASA's value is way beyond exploration, the innovations alone from the space programs thru Gemini and Apollo the space station the shuttle, it's worth it. You want to know why because it has value long term value, it's tangible I have no faith the if the monies for this were redistributed it would be done so efficiently and actually get to the people and services that need it.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join