President Trump Wants to Send Humans Back to the Moon by 2020

[zenkai]

Hopefully do something productive in the moon instead of just visiting it.

Like setting up a relay station.

[zEmini]

Whatever gets Trump closer to his god emperor status the better.

But on a serious note, space exploration should be a high priority for the US.

[Ripster42]

Congress, actually. Getting funding for NASA, especially from Republicans, is like pulling teeth.

Obama could have pushed as hard as he wanted, but congress doesn't like budging on this.

Don't want to burst your bubble or anything, but it's because of bipartisan support in congress that the SLS is getting support. Obama wanted to focus nasa on climate change research, congress said, no, build a huge rocket, here's the money to do it, start making plans for mars in the 2040s using this big ass rocket.

[Annoying]

If our goal is mars, then there is a lot to learn from going to the moon again. Especially if we establish a temporary base there.

It's the same reason we have NEEMO, etc.

Practice. Simulate. Succeed.

Yep, one of the real hurdles to exploring is the need for off-planet refueling. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of hydrogen or oxygen on the moon. I'd rather see efforts to pull an asteroid into lunar orbit and use the moon as an asteroid-mining base.

[Ashkiman]

I bet he just wants to claim the moon so he can ban Muslims from there.

[Echiyo]

I really dislike the government trying to dictate what direction NASA should go towards. The problem is that every administration has new grand ideas on what NASA should do in order for that administration to point at it and say 'we did that!' and try to claim brownie points with the public and world. But space plans tend to take a long time to come to proper fruition, so when NASA is constantly being jerked left and right they end up with a lot of partially completed or dead-ended projects and research. The government just needs to fund NASA and let the scientists themselves decide what the best direction is.

I honestly think Trump wants NASA to go to the moon again just to do something flashy that he can say 'Trump was responsible for that' (same as the Wall). I honestly don't think Trump actually cares at all for the actual science - and the interest in wanting to turn profits from space pioneering really shows that.

This new administration is incredibly anti-science and it makes me sick as a progressive and futurist.

[Halicia]

Who the !#@$ is advising Trump that he thinks he can lay claim to the Moon ?

If he'd spoken to ANYONE in Nasa, or even the private space industry, they'd have told him he was !@#$ing nuts, and that you can't do that.

It was enough of a stretch that they now let corporations own what they bring back to terra firma from space, but if you wanna start hopping around planets and claiming them against all international law, well.... my head hurts.

[Ripster42]

I really dislike the government trying to dictate what direction NASA should go towards. The problem is that every administration has new grand ideas on what NASA should do in order for that administration to point at it and say 'we did that!' and try to claim brownie points with the public and world. But space plans tend to take a long time to come to proper fruition, so when NASA is constantly being jerked left and right they end up with a lot of partially completed or dead-ended projects and research. The government just needs to fund NASA and let the scientists themselves decide what the best direction is.

I honestly think Trump wants NASA to go to the moon again just to do something flashy that he can say 'Trump was responsible for that' (same as the Wall). I honestly don't think Trump actually cares at all for the actual science - and the interest in wanting to turn profits from space pioneering really shows that.

This new administration is incredibly anti-science and it makes me sick as a progressive and futurist.

After obama, the president largely doesn't get to decide things like this anymore. Congress passed a law about when SLS will be used. @Skroe likely has a more detailed explanation that he has saved in a text file about this.

[Masark]

Based on current battery technology. We almost have to reinvent the way we store and access energy.

No we don't. If you want to do grid level storage, density is totally irrelevant. We have no shortage of space.

What you need is cheap and durable.

For example, using old school nickel-iron batteries, you'd need roughly 2 Sears Towers full of batteries to supply electricity to the USA (all of it) for a day, with no other electricity source. That's nothing in terms of area.

[Darkeon]

I find it super sad that there are people bashing this, but would be throwing fireworks if it was done under a different presidency.

I say good. And even if better if there are plans for more than simply visiting.

[Melkandor]

Can we send Trump out there first... and then accidentally forget to bring him back...

Just like they should've done with Hussein Obama

[Skroe]

Okay I;m going to clarify somethings just so we're all on the same page since I guess I have a rep as the "space guy".


First, the thing up for EARLY discussion right now that this terribly written article refers to, is to turn the currently unmanned Mid-2018 flight of SLS Block I / Orion capsule into a manned flight. That flight in it's current unmanned form will orbit the moon to check out systems, before returning to earth. The NEW idea is to modify the Orion capsule with life support systems and seats to make the first flight unmanned. The Orion that flies will have everything but those two components, but modifying the Orion being built for that mission now would involve putting in some temporary technology that would be changed out for follow up flights (like CO2 scrubbers).


Modifying Orion to that purpose, would take about a year to a year and a half, thus 2020. The mission profile would look something like this (this is Orion's planned second flight).



That planned second flight, which was always to be manned, was to be in 2021 on the SLS Block IB.



What are you looking at?

Block I utilizes something called the Delta Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage, which takes the Upper stage from a Delta IV heavy. The purpose of this is mostly to make the Congressionally mandated deadline for flying Orion, as NASA doesn't have the time, nor the money (within the time window) to develop both the core stage and build a new upper stage. The ICPS would only fly on the very first (unmanned) SLS / Orion flight in 2018. All subsequent flights, including the first manned flight in 2021/2022, would utilize the new, larger exploration upper stage, which together with the rest f the SLS Block I componenets minus the ICPS would become "SLS Block 1B" and would be the work horse fo the 2020s.

The the wrinkle with turning the 2018 BLock I flight into a 2020 manned flight is that it would require a crew to fly on the ICPS, which by the way, is not manrated. Is there any disqualifying reason that should PHYSICALLY stop NASA? No. BUt it does not have the redundancy, sensors and safety features that man-rated stage requires, which means it's a risk. Inf act, NASA was considering putting a flight of the SLS Block IB between the first flight of the SLS Block I in 2018 and the first flight of the SLS Block IB in 2022 with an unmanned test flight of the SLS Block IB, just to check out the Exploration Upper Stage's saftey before putting a crew on top of it. Utilizing the ICPS instead in 2020, would incur that risk twice.

Should we do it? While the romantic in me finds a certain appeal in celebrating Apollo 11's 50th or 51st anniversary with the first of a new space vehicle around the world, I think this is extremely ill advised. Doing so would delay the entire schedule of events in the 2020s by 2 years for a one off stunt. Extra money would need to be put into making what amounts to a one off modified version of Orion and making the ICPS as safe as possible, for one flight, which would delay the Exploration Upper Stage. It runs the real risk of making the ICPS the final upper stage and cancelling the EUS all together, and without the EUS, SLS goes from a 105t launcher to a 70t launcher... scarcely better than a Falcon Heavy, which will fly this year. At least with the Block 1B, at almost twice the launch mass (and several times the volume) of a Falcon Heavy, there is something of a case.

NASA is gearing up for it's biggest and best exploration initiative in 50 years. The pieces are assembling. If we're going to change anything, it probably needed to happen three years ago, and it's probably very unwise to do it now. Let's celebrate the 50th anniversary with the second flight in 2021 or 2022!

[HumbleDuck]

And why exactly?

[Skroe]

Hopefully do something productive in the moon instead of just visiting it.

There is zero reason to land on the moon.

Building a staging ground in lunar orbit, the so-called Exploration Gateway Platform, is in the cards.



EGP would utilize modified versions of ISS modules and be used to check out modules and technologies that would be used in its follow-up Mars Transit Vehicle.

The latest official NASA Mars Reference Architecture (from 2009, the new one will be out in a few years).

https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/373665main_...P-2009-566.pdf

Building the Habit/Cargo Hauler would take 4 Ares-V cargo launches... Ares V is the bigger predecessor to the SLS, so it would require something like 5 SLS Block IIs to equal that mass.

Building the Mars Transit Vehicle would take 3 Ares V crew launhes and one Ares I... all but together something like 4 SLS Block IIs and one SLS Block IB.


All put together, the Mars mission would need, just to assemble everything we need in orbit, something like ten SLS launches, each launch costing about $600 million for the launch and starting around $1.5 billion for the payload.

Yeah. Space is expensive.

- - - Updated - - -

If our goal is mars, then there is a lot to learn from going to the moon again. Especially if we establish a temporary base there.

It's the same reason we have NEEMO, etc.

Practice. Simulate. Succeed.

Antarctica is a better analog for Mars than the Moon. The vehicles, suits, habitats used for the moon are entirely different and would be completely unsuitable for Mars.

[Deleted]

Back to the moon?

He takes the illegal alien thing a bit too literal

[Ryme]

One of the few things I, perhaps naively as @Skroe just explained, support Trump in is his refocus of NASA and desire to push space exploration. However, from reading above, I'll just quietly twiddle my thumbs again.

[Adam Jensen]

Cool. If Trump actually does what he needs to do to start space exploration again, I'll give him props and maybe even eat my hat with some sauce.


But Trump has to, you know, stop vowing to cut NASA spending into the ground. NASA kinda actually needs money to send people into space.

Yeah, pretty much this.

Mad props to Trump if he does.

But this won't win me over or change my mind about him. He's an ass and his other policies make him despicable. But I am willing to give credit where credit is due. If he succeeds in getting a man to the moon, then good for him. Honestly.

[Slant]

There is zero reason to land on the moon.

Yeah, there is. And you don't see it, because you're letting your understandable Geekdom get the better of you. It's not about actually landing on the moon. It's about desperately copying Kennedy to give himself some credibility. Nobody gives a fuck about the moon, least of all Trump. But a narcissist like him sure would like to be loved by the masses. Which he isn't. Hence, the carbon copy of one of the most favourite Presidents of all time. Pathetic. At least Obama had the balls to shoot for Mars to follow the US credo of "bigger, better, faster, further" instead of doing shit that everyone already got bored of after the second flight. :P

[zoomgpally]

Can we send Trump out there first... and then accidentally forget to bring him back...

I suggest "accidentally" sending him to the sun instead

[Rucati]

I don't really see the point. I'm all for science and space exploration, but that kind of implies exploring new things. We've been to the moon, it wasn't all that great and I suspect nothing major has happened recently to make it better than the first time.

There's nothing of value on the moon and there's no reason to head back, I will give Trump props for wanting to do something that isn't either batshit retarded or openly sexist/racist/etc. seems like a step in the right direction at least.