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.
CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida, Sep. 10, 2008 (Reuters) — NASA on Wednesday cleared the launch system being developed to replace the space shuttle for a detailed design review, confident the Ares rocket will meet technical, safety and budget requirements.
The new rockets are being designed to carry a capsule-style spacecraft called Orion, which can fly to the moon as well as to the space station in low-Earth orbit.
Originally posted by Badge01You think, given a Moon landing in the late 60s that by 2015 (the scheduled launch date) we'd have something better then chemical rockets...
Originally posted by Matyas
My intention is to bring attention to NASA's seriousness about going back to the Moon. If it is just a bunch of rocks that we have had no interest in for ~40 years, why all of a sudden this kind of push?
At the 21st century's start, few would have predicted that by 2007, a second race for the moon would be under way. Yet the signs are that this is now the case. Furthermore, in today's moon race, unlike the one that took place between the United States and the U.S.S.R. in the 1960s, a full roster of 21st-century global powers, including China and India, are competing.
Even more surprising is that one reason for much of the interest appears to be plans to mine helium-3--purportedly an ideal fuel for fusion reactors but almost unavailable on Earth--from the moon's surface. NASA's Vision for Space Exploration has U.S. astronauts scheduled to be back on the moon in 2020 and permanently staffing a base there by 2024. While the U.S. space agency has neither announced nor denied any desire to mine helium-3, it has nevertheless placed advocates of mining He3 in influential positions. For its part, Russia claims that the aim of any lunar program of its own--for what it's worth, the rocket corporation Energia recently started blustering, Soviet-style, that it will build a permanent moon base by 2015-2020--will be extracting He3.
The Chinese, too, apparently believe that helium-3 from the moon can enable fusion plants on Earth. This fall, the People's Republic expects to orbit a satellite around the moon and then land an unmanned vehicle there in 2011.
Originally posted by Matyas
We can safely conclude that plans are afoot to design and build a new lunar lander to further Lunar exploration. Will it also incorporate radical new design changes from the old LEM like Ares does for the space shuttle?
...these systems would scale well enough that their proponents tend to promote p-B fusion, which requires no exotic fuels like He-3.
Well, in Apollo, both the astronauts went out for EVAs on the surface at the same time, so they could just depressurize the whole lander. With Altair, there will be 4 astronauts in the lander, and they may not all want to go out at the same time. So a hatch is necessary to allow some people to stay in the lander. Also, a hatch adds to the size of the vehicle. The Altair is much larger than the LEM.
Originally posted by Matyas
A hatch is surely a novel concept. Why didn't the original LEMs have one?