From: LARRY KLAES (ljk4_at_msn.com)
Date: Tue Sep 20 2005 - 20:10:45 UTC
>From: "Larry Kellogg" <larry.kellogg_at_sbcglobal.net>
>To: <lunar-update_at_news.altair.com>
>Subject: [lunar-update] NASA News Conference With Mike Griffin:
>ExplorationSystems Architecture Study
>Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:02:49 -0700
>
>Good day.
>
>NASA held a news media conference with Mike Griffin Monday.
>
>This is a bit from SPACE.com by way of CNN.com leading up to the event.
>-----------------------------------------------------
>http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/09/15/nasa.moon/
>NASA to unveil moon plan
>Agency plans to send 4 astronauts to the moon in 2018
>
>By Brian Berger
>SPACE.comexternal link
>Thursday, September 15, 2005; Posted: 11:45 a.m. EDT (15:45 GMT)
>
>(SPACE.com) -- NASA briefed senior White House officials Wednesday on its
>plan to spend $100 billion and the next 12 years building the spacecraft
>and
>rockets it needs to put humans back on the Moon by 2018.
>
>The space agency now expects to roll out its lunar exploration plan to key
>Congressional committees on Friday and to the broader public through a news
>conference on Monday, Washington sources tell SPACE.com.
>
>U.S. President George W. Bush called in January 2004 for the United States
>to return to the Moon by 2020 as the first major step in a broader space
>exploration vision aimed at extending the human presence throughout the
>solar system.
>
>NASA has been working intensely since April on an exploration plan that
>entails building an 18-foot blunt body crew capsule and launchers built
>from
>major space shuttle components including the main engines, solid rocket
>boosters and massive external fuel tanks.
>
>That plan, called the Exploration Systems Architecture Study, was presented
>by NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, his space operations chief Bill
>Gerstenmaier and several other senior agency officials Wednesday afternoon
>to senior White House policy officials, including an advisor to U.S. Vice
>President Richard Cheney and the president's Deputy National Security
>Advisor J.D. Crouch.
>
>NASA's plan, according to briefing charts obtained by SPACE.com, envisions
>beginning a sustained lunar exploration campaign in 2018 by landing four
>astronauts on the Moon for a seven-day stay.
>snip
>-----------------------------------------------------
>
>So wars and hurricanes and we want to learn how to live off World.
>
>Are you up for it?
>
>Larry Kellogg
>
>larry.kellogg at sbcglobal.net
>https://news.altair.com/mailman/listinfo/lunar-update
>http://kelloggserialreports.blogspot.com/
>http://lkellogg.vttoth.com/LarryRussellKellogg/
>http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/
>=======================================================
>http://www.nasawatch.com/
>NASA WATCH
>
>ESAS Transcript
>
>NASA News Conference With Mike Griffin: Exploration Systems Architecture
>Study (Transcript)
>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=18122
>
>"The President has said not later than 2020 for human lunar return. Our
>internal planning goal at this point is 2018. Again, that date will be
>driven by the availability of funds. But if you've heard a rumor that I've
>asked for extra money for this exploration architecture, that would not be
>correct."
>
>Editor's note: However, NASA has requested billions in additional funds for
>Shuttle (RTF), ISS, and Hubble from OMB.
>=======================================================
>In today's space news from SpaceRef:
>
>-- NASA News Conference With Mike Griffin: Exploration Systems Architecture
>Study (Transcript)
>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=18122
>
>"Today is the day when we are talking to you about how NASA will fulfill
>the
>President's vision for
>expiration, as it was offered to NASA in a speech on January 14th of 2004."
>-------------------------------------------------------
>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=18122
>STATUS REPORT
>Date Released: Tuesday, September 20, 2005
>Source: NASA HQ
>
>NASA News Conference With Mike Griffin: Exploration Systems Architecture
>Study (Transcript)
>SEPTEMBER 19, 2005
>
>MR. ACOSTA: Good morning and welcome to NASA Headquarters, here in
>Washington, D. C., for the announcement and rollout of the exploration
>systems architecture study.
>
>And I'm about to introduce NASA administrator Mike Griffin. I want to pass
>along a couple of the guidelines for today's events.
>
>We're going to have an all media--I want to know and let you know that
>we're
>going to have a question and answer period. So, after the administrator
>gives his briefing, we'll open that up to questions here at the
>headquarters
>and we are going to go to a NASA field centers also for questions.
>
>So, without further ado, let me introduce NASA administrator, Mike Griffin.
>
>[Applause]
>
>DR. GRIFFIN: I think I'm on.
>snip
>
>GO TO THE LINK TO READ THE TRANSCRIPT - ONE QUESTION AND ANSWER THOUGH -
>LRK -
>SEE ALSO THE NASA SOLARSYSTEM LINKS BELOW - LRK -
>
>snip
>
>MR. ACOSTA: We will take some questions here at headquarters and then we
>will go around the centers. We will start off here at headquarters.
>
>First, let's go with Tom, right here.
>
>[Whereupon, a question and answer period follows.]
>
>REPORTER : Thank you, Dean. Thank you, Dr. Griffin.
>
>I think the question much of the country is wondering today in the wake of
>this hurricane is how does this country afford being able to go to the
>moon?
>Six weeks ago, the country was, of course, captured by the enthusiasm of
>the
>discovery program returning to space and flight. Today, we're looking at
>two
>to $300 billion to help the people along the Gulf Coast.
>
>Do you have any concerns about whether NASA --pardon me--the Congress will
>be forthcoming in wanting to support this expenditure and how much is this
>all going to coast?
>
>DR. GRIFFIN: Well, that's a lot of questions and I have answers. So, let me
>start.
>
>First of all, we're talking about returning to the moon in 2018. There will
>be a lot more hurricanes and a lot more other natural disasters to befall
>the United States and the world in that time. I hope none worst than
>Katrina. I've been down there. I've flown over the Gulf Coast. I've met
>with
>our employees at Stennis and Michoud and it's just devastating.
>
>But the space program is a long term investment in our future. We must deal
>with our short term problems while not sacrificing our long term
>investments
>in our future. When we have a hurricane, we don't cancel the Air Force. We
>don't cancel the Navy and we're not going to cancel NASA. When we talk
>about
>two or $300 billion of aid to the Gulf Coast, I would point out that, one
>of
>the primary constituents of any aid to a devastated region in the wake of
>any sort of disaster, one of the primary constituents is real jobs. Between
>Michoud and Stennis, NASA and other places on the Gulf Coast,
>frankly--Florida is also a Gulf Coast state--NASA has thousands and
>thousands of real jobs, no WPA work, not reconstruction work, but
>strategically important work that has been done in those regions, in that
>region for decades.
>
>So, I would submit that our first step in recovering from Katrina can't be
>to lay off all the people who were working on the human space flight
>program
>and who were largely resident in the Gulf Coast states.
>
>As to what it's all going to coast, our estimates are about--that it will
>cost for the first human lunar return, it will cost about 55 percent
>measured in constant dollars of what Apollo cost spread out over 13 years.
>Apollo was done in eight years. So, spreading it out over 13 years, it will
>cost about 55 percent of what Apollo cost, a specific number in today's
>dollars, about $104 billion for the first human lunar return along the
>lines
>of the architecture you saw today.
>
>Let me also point out that, for the first five or six years, what we are
>really developing is the shuttle successor, the crew exploration vehicle.
>The crew exploration vehicle is designed with its launch system to go to
>low
>earth orbit. Once you're in low earth orbit, you can do any number of
>things. You must go through low earth orbit to go anywhere else. We can go
>to the moon. In later decades, we can go to Mars. We can service the space
>station. We can undertake the service of the Hubble space telescope or
>other
>space telescopes, as may exist. We can do anything.
>
>This new vehicle is the vehicle that lets us do that and unless the United
>States wants to get out of the manned space flight business completely,
>then
>this is the vehicle we need to be building. And I don't hear anyone saying
>that the United States would be better off being out of space when other
>nations are there.
>
>So, that's my answer, Tom.
>
>MR. ACOSTA: All right, let's go with Frank, right up here.
>snip
>=======================================================
>http://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/cev.html
>Before the end of the next decade, NASA astronauts will again explore the
>surface of the moon. And this time, we're going to stay, building outposts
>and paving the way for eventual journeys to Mars and beyond. There are
>echoes of the iconic images of the past, but it won't be your grandfather's
>moon shot.
>snip
> LEARN MORE:
>Explore the new spaceship with a slideshow, video, animation and 3-D models
>in our Flash Feature.
>+ Full Resolution Images
>http://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/cev_hi_res.html
>+ Animation (25 Mb QuickTime)
>http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/cev/CEVedit2.mov
>+ Frequently Asked Questions
>http://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/cev_faq.html
>+ Fact Sheet (28 Kb PDF)
>http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/133820main_ESAS_Facts.pdf
>+ Presentation (5.9 Mb PDF)
>http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/133654main_ESAS_charts.pdf
>+ September 19 Briefing (95 Kb PDF)
>http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/133896main_ESAS_rollout_press.pdf
>+ Exploration Systems Web site http://exploration.nasa.gov/
>snip
>=======================================================
>http://www.nss.org/
>snip
>NASA sets out an inspiring, affordable path for future exploration
>(September 19, 2005)
>NSS hails the formal announcement of NASA's Exploration System
>architecture.
>"We are going back to the Moon and on to Mars with a plan that the nation
>can afford," said George T. Whitesides, Executive Director of NSS. Under
>the
>plan, the first new moon landing will take place in 2018, with startup of a
>lunar outpost in 2022.
>
>Full text of the press release.
>http://www.nss.org/news/releases/pr20050919.html
>More information on the new exploration systems architecture is available
>from NASA, http://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/cev.html
>and you can discuss the new plan in our online forum.
>http://www.nss.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=84
>snip
>
>=======================================================
>http://space.com/news/050920_nasa_moon_response.html
>NASA's Moon Vision: Action Plan or High-Tech Hallucination?
>By Leonard David
>Senior Space Writer
>posted: 20 September 2005
>11:19 a.m. ET
>
>NASA’s rollout of a strategy to return people to the Moon and eventually
>plant footprints on the distant sands of Mars is sparking both praise and
>criticism.
>
>Michael Griffin, NASA’s administrator, publicly unveiled yesterday the
>space
>agency’s $104 billion mastermind of a mission that puts astronauts back on
>the moon by 2018, setting the stage for future expeditionary trips to the
>red planet.
>
>New space travel hardware – a Crew Exploration Vehicle and the requisite
>boosters for tossing people and cargo beyond low Earth orbit – is part of
>the must-have agenda.
>
>But analogous to one of Newton’s laws of physics that drives rocketry --
>but
>in a 21st century context -- for every action plan there is always an equal
>but opposite reaction.
>
>Lacks pizzazz, budgetary timing
>
>Editorial pundits, such as the New York Times, while saluting NASA’s
>“Apollo
>on steroids” approach, also noted: “Unfortunately, the new plan lacks the
>pizzazz to inspire public support and will be operating under budget
>constraints that make delays or overruns likely.”
>
>snip
>
>Critical path caution
>
>In taking a preliminary look at the NASA architecture, the geologist in
>Schmitt provoked a worry.
>
>“One caution at this point is to not put the presence of ice at the lunar
>poles in the critical path to success for the architecture,” Schmitt said.
>“It is not a proven resource in spite of reports to the contrary. On the
>other hand, elemental hydrogen implanted by the solar wind -- in contrast
>to
>water-ice that has come from cometary impacts -- is clearly concentrated in
>the polar regions over that present in lower latitudes,” he said.
>
>Schmitt said, however, that there is enough hydrogen everywhere on the Moon
>to produce water and oxygen. “Thus, selection of a site for semi-permanent
>lunar base should be approached with an open mind until we know for sure
>that ice is present and economically accessible at the poles.”
>
>In his forthcoming book, Return to the Moon: Exploration, Enterprise, and
>Energy in the Human Settlement of Space, published by Praxis-Springer,
>Schmitt spotlights the role of the Moon in supporting an energy-hungry
>Earth. That prospect appears to be a missing-in-action aspect within NASA’s
>new architecture, Schmitt said.
>
>“Another consideration for site selection not yet apparent in the
>architecture is verification of regional concentrations of helium-3, a
>potentially highly valuable, commercial energy resource for use in
>terrestrial fusion power plants,” Schmitt pointed out.
>
>Schmitt also argued that the long-term architecture related to flights to
>Mars “must eventually contain a full, scientifically credible understanding
>of the long term effects of the space environment on human performance and
>health.”
>
>
>No Apollo replay
>
>Paul Spudis, a lunar and planetary scientist at the Applied Physics
>Laboratory, a research and development arm of the Johns Hopkins University
>in Laurel, Maryland, takes issue with those that see the NASA vision as an
>Apollo replay.
>
>There is significant difference in Apollo of yesteryear judged against the
>NASA plan of today, Spudis said.
>
>In the first place, the systems making up the vehicles are being designed
>for maximum leverage: long-life, cryogenic-based propulsion, potential
>reuse
>in space, Spudis explained.
>
>Secondly, the mission is different.
>
>“In Apollo, the mission was to prove we could land on the Moon and return
>safely to Earth. In this case, the mission is to determine the best site to
>collect and use the resources of the Moon and to emplace the necessary
>infrastructure to do so,” Spudis said. “Admittedly, the early missions will
>be very much like a ‘super-Apollo.’ However, they have potential to grow
>into something very different.”
>snip
>=======================================================
>Thanks for looking up with me.
>- LRK -
>=======================================================
>
>WHAT THE MIND CAN CONCEIVE, AND BELIEVE, IT WILL
>ACHIEVE - LRK
>
>=======================================================
>
>This is the lunar-update at news.altair.com
>https://news.altair.com/mailman/listinfo/lunar-update
>mailing list!
>
>This list is a moderated list. The moderator is Larry
>Kellogg
>(larry.kellogg at sbcglobal.net
>https://news.altair.com/mailman/listinfo/lunar-update
>Please send suggestions for postings directly to
>Larry.
>
>Larry's blog site, is:
>http://kelloggserialreports.blogspot.com/
>
>General information about the mailing list is at:
>https://news.altair.com/mailman/listinfo/lunar-update
>
>=======================================================
>end
>
>_______________________________________________
>lunar-update mailing list, moderated by Larry Kellogg
>To unsubscribe or change your options please visit:
>http://news.altair.com/mailman/listinfo/lunar-update
>Forwarded by GNU Mailman at Altair Engineering, Inc. http://www.altair.com/
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Tue Sep 20 2005 - 20:18:07 UTC