Science Features

No money for Mars, Obama's space panel says (News Feature)

By Anne K Walters Aug 13, 2009, 1:12 GMT

Washington - Humans can forget about returning to the moon or travelling on to Mars unless more money than is currently planned for is spent, an independent panel reviewing the US human space flight programme said Wednesday.

The panel created by President Barack Obama is tasked with reexamining all aspects of manned spaceflight, including the planned retirement of the space shuttle next year and plans to return humans to the moon by 2020.

The 11-member panel of former astronauts and aerospace experts will meet with White House officials and NASA policymakers on Friday and write its report by the end of the month.

The report will not offer firm recommendations, but instead outline a number of options that address when to phase out the ageing space shuttles, what to do with the International Space Station (ISS), how to get the next generation spacecraft into orbit, how to get astronauts into low Earth orbit and where humans should travel next in space.

But a review of all options found that no future exploration - whether to the moon, Mars or elsewhere - could be accomplished under the current spending plan of about 9 billion dollars per year on exploration. At least 3 billion dollars more per year is needed to meet current goals, former astronaut and committee member Sally Ride said in a presentation on the costs.

'If Santa Claus brought us this programme tomorrow, our next step would have to be to cancel it,' said Jeff Greason, a committee member and CEO of XCOR Aerospace.

Former Lockheed CEO Norman Augustine, who is the panel's chairman, told reporters he was surprised that no options would fit within the current budget.

'One of the things that's troubled NASA the most in recent years is having objectives that they don't have the resources to match and we don't want to contribute to that, so we're telling it like it is,' he said.

But the panel doesn't want to give up on eventual plans to send humans to Mars. In discussions at their last public meeting on Wednesday, the members made clear that it should be the ultimate goal of all human spaceflight.

But they ruled out heading straight there, opting instead to tell policymakers to either establish a base on the moon as a jumping off point to Mars, as is currently planned, or instead to turn NASA's attention towards exploring elsewhere in deep space, with stops on a nearby asteroid or other object, views of the sun and flybys of Mars before eventually stopping on the moon and then Mars.

The panel also wants NASA to extend the life of the space shuttle programme until at least 2011 to prevent the remaining construction flights to the ISS from being rushed.

Current plans call for the retirement of the shuttle by the end of next year, leaving astronauts reliant on Russian Soyuz craft for transport to the ISS and the scrapping of the station itself in 2016.

Alternately, the shuttle could continue to fly through 2015, albeit on a much reduced schedule.

The panel also wants to focus on development of commercial vehicles to transport astronauts to the ISS. Most of the options they are proposing include extending the station's mission until at least 2020.



COMMENT

blog comments powered by Disqus

Latest Headlines in Science

Older Talkback

page: 1 

SP4: andAug 13th, 2009 - 18:46:26

...what other reason is there to have a manned space program if we do not go to Mars?

Report this comment

Try going to the Moon first...Aug 14th, 2009 - 10:55:13

'what other reason is there to have a manned space program if we do not go to Mars?'

YOU COULD TRY GOING TO THE MOON FIRST,...

For those poor deluded souls who believe all they are told,...

Explain why the rocket engine has not blown away the dust under (and around) the 'lunar lander'.

You know, the thick dust that the actors left their footprints in,...

You know, the thick dust in, e.g., this NASA photograph:

LINK www .hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5917.jpg (remove space)

LINK cleveland.indymedia.org/uploads/2009/06/nasa-as11-40-5917.jpg (smaller)

This is just one example. There are hundreds of such photos.

Another thing to think about: Why do you think the 'lunar lander' weighing about 6,500 kgs (this light because it has used much of its fuel) didn't sink into the dust? After all, the 75 kg actors sunk suspiciously far into the soil.

Don't you think that the impact of a 6.5 tonne object that has just dropped 'out of the sky' just might sink into the soft soil a little bit further than 'it did' (see photo).

When I was a child I used to jump off a 5 foot wall into soft grassy soil, I used to sink in some 10 cms (3-4 inches),... don't you think that a 6.5 tonne object might sink in at least 10 cms (3-4 inches)? But,... it actually seems to be sitting above the soil level. Have a look.

Report this comment

Try going to the Moon first...Aug 14th, 2009 - 10:57:03

I am still waiting for some sort of reply to my comments

On Earth, the lunar lander rocket engine was rated at:

44,000 Newtons = 4,500 kgf (10,000 lbf).

Since on the Moon, gravity and friction are one sixth that of Earth, this corresponds to:

6 x 44,000 = 264,000 Newtons = 27,000 kgf (60,000 lbf),

So, to see what effect the lunar lander rocket would have while on the Moon, we need to observe an engine that can put out 264,000 Newtons, on Earth.

A Boeing 747 Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4G2 jet engine is rated at:

240,000 Newtons = 25,000 kgf (54,750 lbf).

The Pratt & Whitney is not quite this powerful, but close enough. So, on the Moon, the lunar lander rocket would be slightly more powerful than this Boeing 747 engine is, on Earth.

To see what such a jet engine (at not much over idle, since the plane does not move) does to a car that gets in caught in its exhaust, watch the animated GIF or video found at:

LINK guardian.ifastnet.com/pentagon/small/jet-blast.htm

I reckon that would move a bit of dust.

What do you think?

So, if (on the Moon) the lander rocket was laid on its side, fired up, and the same car as in the animation/video, is pulled in front of it, then the lander rocket would toss it slightly further than the Boeing 747 engine did on Earth. This is simply because everything weighs one sixth what it does on Earth (and friction is one sixth).

(Note that since on the Moon, all the forces involved are one sixth those on Earth, the car may be tossed slightly further, but this would all occur at a slower speed than on Earth, just like, free-falling on the Moon takes longer.)

Clearly, while landing, the lunar lander rocket would have removed every last speck of dust in the area.

Clearly, the Moon landing was one giant HOAX.

Report this comment

page: 1 

Follow Us

Follow M&C on Pinterest

Search

Custom Search

Sites We Like

NASA
New Scientist

Also Check Out

Hilary Duff, Rachael Leigh Cook kicked off the Bing Summer of Doing

Hilary Duff, Rachael Leigh Cook kicked off the Bing Summer of Doing
Yesterday, Bing and DoSomething.org kicked off the Bing Summer of Doing with a day of service at Heart of Los Angeles (HOLA) with Hilary Duff, Cody Simpson, Teresa Palmer, Rachael Leigh Cook, and more. ... more

Kelly Clarkson optimistic about love

Kelly Clarkson optimistic about love
Kelly Clarkson has 'high hopes' for her new relationship with Brandon Blackstock. ... more

Justin Bieber can't move eyebrow after concussion

Justin Bieber cant move eyebrow after concussion
Justin Bieber can't move his eyebrow after running into a glass wall on Thursday (31.05.12) and suffering a concussion. ... more

Pamela Anderson wants to move back to Canada

Pamela Anderson wants to move back to Canada
Pamela Anderson wants to move back to Canada, because she feels like she is 'playing a character' when she is in Los Angeles. ... more

Queen Elizabeth excited about concert

Queen Elizabeth excited about concert
Britain's Queen Elizabeth can't wait for the Diamond Jubilee Concert on Monday (04.06.12), says event organiser Gary Barlow. ... more

Usher: I'm a genius

Usher: Im a genius
Usher has a strong sense of self-belief and believes everything he does is 'genius'. ... more

Jake Shears received death threat

Jake Shears received death threat
Scissor Sisters singer Jake Shears had his security boosted after a death threat against him was intercepted by his management team. ... more

One Direction gain police protect in Canada

One Direction gain police protect in Canada
' X Factor' 2010 rejects have stuck to their word and bulked up on security. ... more

Susan Boyle has emotional motorway breakdown

Susan Boyle has emotional motorway breakdown
'Britain's Got Talent' reject was screaming and crying. ... more

Russell Brand: Tom Cruise is a joy to be around

Russell Brand: Tom Cruise is a joy to be around
'Rock Of Ages' actor says his co-star cooked him a birthday dinner. ... more