NASA considers orbital outpost near moon as next big project

"Top NASA officials have picked a leading candidate
for the agency's next major mission: construction of
an outpost that would send astronauts farther from
Earth than they've ever been.

Called the gateway spacecraft, it would hover in orbit
on the far side of the moon, support a small crew and
function as a staging area for future missions to the
moon and Mars."

See:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,1625900.story

On Sep 23, 6:16*pm, wrote:
"Top NASA officials have picked a leading candidate
for the agency's next major mission: construction of
an outpost that would send astronauts farther from
Earth than they've ever been.

Called the gateway spacecraft, it would hover in orbit
on the far side of the moon, support a small crew and
function as a staging area for future missions to the
moon and Mars."

See:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...sa-outpost-201...

I posted this same thing earllier today.....

so they are trying to give SLS a mission? with one launch a year, and
because of that nasa will need a different system to get humans to the
station......

now just exactly what research will the new station be doing? and how
idoes it differ from previous stations like MIR and ISS????

On Sep 23, 10:22*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Sep 23, 6:16*pm, wrote:

"Top NASA officials have picked a leading candidate
for the agency's next major mission: construction of
an outpost that would send astronauts farther from
Earth than they've ever been.

Called the gateway spacecraft, it would hover in orbit
on the far side of the moon, support a small crew and
function as a staging area for future missions to the
moon and Mars."

See:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...sa-outpost-201...

I posted this same thing earllier today.....

so they are trying to give SLS a mission? with one launch a year, and
because of that nasa will need a different system to get humans to the
station......

now just exactly what research will the new station be doing? and how
idoes it differ from previous stations like MIR and ISS????

the cost to maintain launch facilties and workers for one launch a
year will be a killer.

Typical Bobbert. It's not like this is going to be the only SLS mission,
twerp.

Ever hear of other L-Points? Say, Earth-Sun L1 or L2? Not to mention this
administration's precious NEO mission.....

The luddite approach that you advocate has been rejected, not only by this
Administration (one of the few things they've ever gotten right-once
Congress set them straight after that FY 11 budget fiasco), but by Congress.
And if you ever watch Ed Crawley's FlexPath presentation, he advocates lunar
orbit, not just to prove the new spacecraft, but as a sign "that the U.S.
can return to the lunar surface whenver we feel like it." The "look but
don't touch" is only a temporary approach. Boots on the ground in due
course. You may now go back to your mass-produced MER-class rover fantasy
world....
"bob haller" wrote in message
...
On Sep 23, 10:22 pm, bob haller wrote:
On Sep 23, 6:16 pm, wrote:

"Top NASA officials have picked a leading candidate
for the agency's next major mission: construction of
an outpost that would send astronauts farther from
Earth than they've ever been.

Called the gateway spacecraft, it would hover in orbit
on the far side of the moon, support a small crew and
function as a staging area for future missions to the
moon and Mars."

See:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...sa-outpost-201...

I posted this same thing earllier today.....

so they are trying to give SLS a mission? with one launch a year, and
because of that nasa will need a different system to get humans to the
station......

now just exactly what research will the new station be doing? and how
idoes it differ from previous stations like MIR and ISS????

the cost to maintain launch facilties and workers for one launch a
year will be a killer.

NASA's been talking about this for some time: it's been mentioned on
nasaspaceflight.com, also on SpaceRef, IIRC. One concept uses ISS hardware
that was built, but not flown, for this facility.
wrote in message
...
"Top NASA officials have picked a leading candidate
for the agency's next major mission: construction of
an outpost that would send astronauts farther from
Earth than they've ever been.

Called the gateway spacecraft, it would hover in orbit
on the far side of the moon, support a small crew and
function as a staging area for future missions to the
moon and Mars."

See:


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...ost-20120923,0
,1625900.story

bob haller wrote:
On Sep 23, 6:16Â*pm, wrote:
"Top NASA officials have picked a leading candidate
for the agency's next major mission: construction of
an outpost that would send astronauts farther from
Earth than they've ever been.

Called the gateway spacecraft, it would hover in orbit
on the far side of the moon, support a small crew and
function as a staging area for future missions to the
moon and Mars."

See:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...sa-outpost-201...

I posted this same thing earllier today.....

so they are trying to give SLS a mission? with one launch a year, and
because of that nasa will need a different system to get humans to the
station......

now just exactly what research will the new station be doing? and how
idoes it differ from previous stations like MIR and ISS????
... it's like future spacecraft without engine;-) ISS is proteced
by earth magnetosphere, gateway spececraft don't. Regards
Adam Przybyla

Fred, you responded to the part of the Bobbert's post that I heartily disagree with.

As for launch rate, that's how many flights to put the components in position? and then, unless automated rondezvous and docking is used, you'll have some assembly flights. Then there's crew rotation, resupply, etc. Not to mention staging things like a lunar lander (bonus if the ascent stage is reusable in whatever Altair plus version is developed) to the surface-if that's the plan to get to the surface that NASA decides to go with. Souds like a pretty decent launch rate in the first year or two before things settle down.

On Sunday, September 23, 2012 11:19:31 PM UTC-7, Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Matt Wiser" wrote:





the cost to maintain launch facilties and workers for one launch a

year will be a killer.





Only if that pad can only handle the one launch system. If it can

handle others, everything gets a lot cheaper.



--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable

man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,

all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

--George Bernard Shaw

On Sep 24, 1:32*pm, Matt Wiser wrote:
Fred, you responded to the part of the Bobbert's post that I heartily disagree with.

As for launch rate, that's how many flights to put the components in position? and then, unless automated rondezvous and docking is used, you'll have some assembly flights. Then there's crew rotation, resupply, etc. Not to mention staging things like a lunar lander (bonus if the ascent stage is reusable in whatever Altair plus version is developed) to the surface-if that's the plan to get to the surface that NASA decides to go with. Souds like a pretty decent launch rate in the first year or two before things settle down.



On Sunday, September 23, 2012 11:19:31 PM UTC-7, Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Matt Wiser" wrote:

the cost to maintain launch facilties and workers for one launch a

year will be a killer.

Only if that pad can only handle the one launch system. *If it can

handle others, everything gets a lot cheaper.

--

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable

*man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,

*all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --George Bernard Shaw

the nasa statement said launch rate of ONE per year.........

In sci.space.policy message 3ba3fc31-67e8-4163-869d-dccaee8672bc@r8g200
0pbf.googlegroups.com, Sun, 23 Sep 2012 15:16:45,
posted:

"Top NASA officials have picked a leading candidate
for the agency's next major mission: construction of
an outpost that would send astronauts farther from
Earth than they've ever been.

Called the gateway spacecraft, it would hover in orbit
on the far side of the moon, support a small crew and
function as a staging area for future missions to the
moon and Mars."

See:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...-nasa-outpost-
20120923,0,1625900.story


If that's right, then one thing that NASA needs to do ASAP is to teach
all of its PR and public-writing staff just how to describe the Lagrange
Points simply but accurately (including what Lagrange's actual
contribution was). After that it will be time to work on the more
amateurish journalists.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via homepage. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.

wrote in message
...
"Top NASA officials have picked a leading candidate
for the agency's next major mission: construction of
an outpost that would send astronauts farther from
Earth than they've ever been.

Called the gateway spacecraft, it would hover in orbit
on the far side of the moon, support a small crew and
function as a staging area for future missions to the
moon and Mars."



NASA can make plans to colonize Alpha Centauri if they
like, it doesn't mean they'll ever get funding from any
administration anytime in the foreseeable future.

To hear Garver say NASA's fixation for the future is the Moon
and beyond is almost funny, if it wasn't such a sad sign that NASA
has completely lost touch with political reality.

There's no money for the Moon, no mandate, no political
or real public support. Nada, zilch, we're not going back
to the Moon in any of our life times.

The only explanation for this NASA Lunacy is that
Big-Aero is chomping at the bit for some gravy no-compete
gold plated contracts that only a useless mission to the
Moon etc can provide.

If NASA wants funding for a new long term goal, let it
begin with a plan that saves the economy or ecosystem
or the ...world. Then someone might listen.

But just offering more gilded safaris of one kind or another
is a recipe for the total demise of NASA.




s




See:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,1625900.story