Are there any rumors of a big NASA lunar space policy due any day now?

As the 20 May 2006 edition of Air & Space on it's cover shows the
proposed new lunar lander, and on Thursday it'll be 45 years to the
day since America's President Kennedy did his '...we choose to go to
the Moon...' speech. Are there any rumours or indications of an
official announcement or green light to go back?

--

Christopher

on Thursday it'll be 45 years to the day since America's President
Kennedy did his '...we choose to go to the Moon...' speech. Are there
any rumours or indications of an official announcement or green light
to go back?

There's a great article at http://www.thespacereview.com/article/627/1
which, among other things, claims we have seen such an announcement
several times (e.g. Bush's SEI speech), and how it didn't have nearly
the effect of Kennedy's speech.

Jim Kingdon wrote:

on Thursday it'll be 45 years to the day since America's President
Kennedy did his '...we choose to go to the Moon...' speech. Are there
any rumours or indications of an official announcement or green light
to go back?

There's a great article at http://www.thespacereview.com/article/627/1
which, among other things, claims we have seen such an announcement
several times (e.g. Bush's SEI speech), and how it didn't have nearly
the effect of Kennedy's speech.

It would be interesting to actually figure out how much impact
Kennedy's speech actually had - and how much impact came from the
Apollo Program becoming his posthumous monument.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

On Mon, 22 May 2006 20:33:01 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(Derek Lyons) made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

There's a great article at http://www.thespacereview.com/article/627/1
which, among other things, claims we have seen such an announcement
several times (e.g. Bush's SEI speech), and how it didn't have nearly
the effect of Kennedy's speech.

It would be interesting to actually figure out how much impact
Kennedy's speech actually had - and how much impact came from the
Apollo Program becoming his posthumous monument.

It would be interesting, if there were any way to do that in an
indisputable way. Unfortunately, history remains unamenable to such
controlled experiments for now.

h (Rand Simberg) wrote:

On Mon, 22 May 2006 20:33:01 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(Derek Lyons) made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

There's a great article at http://www.thespacereview.com/article/627/1
which, among other things, claims we have seen such an announcement
several times (e.g. Bush's SEI speech), and how it didn't have nearly
the effect of Kennedy's speech.

It would be interesting to actually figure out how much impact
Kennedy's speech actually had - and how much impact came from the
Apollo Program becoming his posthumous monument.

It would be interesting, if there were any way to do that in an
indisputable way. Unfortunately, history remains unamenable to such
controlled experiments for now.

Now certainly one could not arrive at a definitive statement, but
building a reasonable case could easily be done. Once could examine
budget figures, editorials, the Congressional Record, mass media
publications, etc... etc... All-in-all pretty standard research
methods for any historian and pretty routinely done.

There's no particular need for an 'indisputable' answer.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

"Jeff Findley" wrote:

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...

It would be interesting to actually figure out how much impact
Kennedy's speech actually had - and how much impact came from the
Apollo Program becoming his posthumous monument.

And I think people tend to forget that Kennedy was a small piece of this
entire equation, IMHO.

The bigger influences were that:

1. Space travel was cool and new and there was much excitement generated
for manned spaceflight because of this.
2. Those "godless commies" were neck and neck with us technologically and
were already ahead of us the "space race". This was somewhat of a black eye
to US.

So? The bald fact remains that prior to Kennedy's speech - there
wasn't a coherent lunar program, and aftwards one came into being.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Jeff Findley wrote:

The next first was the US space shuttle, the first "reusable" space vehicle
that landed on a runway. By then, the Soviets/Russians were clearly tired
of the space race and didn't fund their space shuttle or it's launch
vehicle, beyond a single unmanned Buran test flight.

IIRC the Russians were scared of the shuttle and (presumably) forced a
similar design upon their designers. Weren't they talking about giant H
bombs carried by the shuttle, "bombing runs" and the snatching of
satelites? Unfortunately, emulating the US design meant the hatchet for
more promissing reusable vehicle being studied at the time.
IMHO, Buran was killed by political instability (fall of the USSR). As
for making the unmanned flight, their cosmonauts (Leonov included)
pleaded for a crew on that flight, but ...
On a side line, I think Buran would have made a better shuttle and
Energia was a great HLV.

Conclusion? Apollo was a temporary aberration brought on more by cold war
competition than by anything else. As such, the high levels of funding that
Apollo enjoyed are highly unlikely to return to NASA, at least until
something fundamental changes. I doubt that fundamental change is coming
anytime soon.

Too damn bad. I wonder was the price tag would have been for a token
Moon program that would have kept Apollo hardware flying say once /
twice a year.

Jeff Findley wrote:
"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
It would be interesting to actually figure out how much impact
Kennedy's speech actually had - and how much impact came from the
Apollo Program becoming his posthumous monument.

And I think people tend to forget that Kennedy was a small piece of this
entire equation, IMHO.

The bigger influences were that:

1. Space travel was cool and new and there was much excitement generated
for manned spaceflight because of this.
2. Those "godless commies" were neck and neck with us technologically and
were already ahead of us the "space race". This was somewhat of a black eye
to US.

All Kennedy did was to set a new goal for the US, and Soviets, to shoot for.
Kennedy's speech was in May of 1961, which was already well into the "space
race". The Soviets had already beaten the US to several space firsts, not
the least was the first man to orbit the earth, which was Yuri Gagarin in
the previous month! At that point in the space race, the "godless commies"
were already ahead.


Now jump foreword to 1970. The US had already beaten the soviets to the
moon, and with every year, it looked like they wouldn't even attempt a
manned lunar flight.

The next first was manned space stations, which the Soviets again could
claim as a first. The US Skylab came later and was better in many ways when
compared to the Soviet's Salyut stations, but the US only launched one
station in the 70's and is only partially responsible for ISS, where the
Soviets/Russians have a clear track record in keeping men in cans in LEO.

The next first was the US space shuttle, the first "reusable" space vehicle
that landed on a runway. By then, the Soviets/Russians were clearly tired
of the space race and didn't fund their space shuttle or it's launch
vehicle, beyond a single unmanned Buran test flight.

So today, there isn't much of a space race at all. Men is LEO is boring.
Men on the moon was done nearly four decades ago, so it's hardly a "first".
The next first, manned mission to Mars, seems like a pipe dream, since no
government program has gotten serious funding, due to it's potentially
extreme price tag.

Conclusion? Apollo was a temporary aberration brought on more by cold war
competition than by anything else. As such, the high levels of funding that
Apollo enjoyed are highly unlikely to return to NASA, at least until
something fundamental changes. I doubt that fundamental change is coming
anytime soon.

TSTO - Delta IV Medium

It's here now.

SSTO - Single Stage to Orbit.

Ten Meters. It's coming.

RLV - TSTO winged reusable launch vehicles.

You can't stop it now, Rutan is working on it.

NASA and the DOD are ****ting bricks about commercial space.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org

On Mon, 22 May 2006 22:38:04 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(Derek Lyons) made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

It would be interesting to actually figure out how much impact
Kennedy's speech actually had - and how much impact came from the
Apollo Program becoming his posthumous monument.

It would be interesting, if there were any way to do that in an
indisputable way. Unfortunately, history remains unamenable to such
controlled experiments for now.

Now certainly one could not arrive at a definitive statement, but
building a reasonable case could easily be done. Once could examine
budget figures, editorials, the Congressional Record, mass media
publications, etc... etc... All-in-all pretty standard research
methods for any historian and pretty routinely done.

There's no particular need for an 'indisputable' answer.

laughing

There is for those who would dispute it.

Derek Lyons wrote:
"Jeff Findley" wrote:
"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...

It would be interesting to actually figure out how much impact
Kennedy's speech actually had - and how much impact came from the
Apollo Program becoming his posthumous monument.
And I think people tend to forget that Kennedy was a small piece of this
entire equation, IMHO.

The bigger influences were that:

1. Space travel was cool and new and there was much excitement generated
for manned spaceflight because of this.
2. Those "godless commies" were neck and neck with us technologically and
were already ahead of us the "space race". This was somewhat of a black eye
to US.

So? The bald fact remains that prior to Kennedy's speech - there
wasn't a coherent lunar program, and aftwards one came into being

I like this part :

"We propose to develop alternate liquid and solid fuel boosters, much
larger than any now being developed, until certain which is superior."

"We propose additional funds for other engine development and for
unmanned explorations ..."

Here it is 45 years later, and we're still thrashing it out.

At least back then, he had his priorities straight.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org