Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


America's mission to the Moon faces a bumpy ride as Nasa enters a new era

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 12 January 2009
AMERICA'S plans for manned missions to the Moon are set for a shake-up that could make or break the country's lead in the space race – and bring new risks.
Dr Michael Griffin, who was appointed to lead Nasa by President George Bush four years ago, is expected to step down this Friday after the incoming Barack Obama failed to renew his tenure.

The removal of the 59-year-old rocket engineer – credited
with restoring credibility and purpose to Nasa after the Columbia disaster of 2003, in which seven astronauts died – paves the way for potential changes to Constellation, the programme by which humans will again step on to the Moon and venture beyond to Mars using new spaceships.

But extending the life of the shuttle to close the gap between its planned retirement next year and the launch of its replacement in 2015, an option Mr Obama has proposed, would cost an extra $3 billion (£2 billion) a year and vastly raise the chances of another deadly accident, Dr Griffin has warned.

Flying the shuttle twice a year from 2011 to 2015 would pose "about a one-in-eight chance of losing another crew on one of those ten flights", he told a meeting of the Space Transportation Association. "It can be done. Whether it should be done is another question," he said.

Keeping the shuttle flying beyond its intended retirement date would also risk diverting manpower, money, equipment and facilities such as launchpads and assembly plants away from Constellation, causing further slippage.

One of the major issues being examined by Mr Obama's transition team, with whom Dr Griffin is said to have clashed in recent weeks, is whether Ares 1 – the $2.7 billion rocket model currently under development as a means of launching humans into space after the shuttle – should be scrapped.

Critics say it is flawed and too expensive, and Nasa should fall back on alternative designs or existing military models that could also speed up the programme. But Dr Griffin and other proponents say Ares is America's best chance of a new era of space exploration and that changing tack now would threaten the timetable.

Nasa owns three shuttles – Atlantis, Discovery and Endeavour, the oldest of which is now 28 years old.

They are due to fly another eight missions to ferry crew, equipment and construction parts to the International Space Station (ISS) 220 miles above Earth – plus one to repair the Hubble space telescope another 160 miles further out – before being withdrawn from service at the end of 2010.

After that, under the current plan, Nasa would have to pay the Russian space agency to ferry American astronauts back and forth until Ares – and Orion, the new crew-carrying spaceship that will launch on top of it – are ready to head to the ISS. Such a move would be a major humiliation to the US.

"Our space programme is something the US has taken a leadership position in for almost 50 years and to say we are not going to try to maintain that leadership in some significant way would be a negative sign," said Professor John Logsdon, a space policy expert at the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum.

Under present plans, the aim is to get American astronauts back on the lunar surface by 2020, 51 years after Neil Armstrong made his first giant leap for mankind.

Prof Logsdon said: "The Moon by 2020 is already a difficult goal.

If we switch goals it means we are changing our plans for the Moon, or delaying the first return to the Moon."

Frontrunners for Dr Griffin's job include Charles Bolden, a former space shuttle commander, and Charlie Kennel, a former head of Nasa's Earth science division and chairman of the National Academy of Science's Space Studies Board.

Prof Logsdon added: "It's time to retire the shuttle and put the resources into the next programme rather than continue to fly it out of pride."

BACKGROUND

EACH shuttle was originally designed by NASA for a projected lifespan of 100 launches or 10 years' operational life – the oldest is now nearly 28, which is a testament to the durability of the vessel. Six air-worthy shuttles have been built; the first orbiter, Enterprise, was not built for space flight and was used only for testing purposes. Five space-worthy orbiters were built: Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour.

Challenger disintegrated 73 seconds after launch in 1986, and Endeavour was built as a replacement. Columbia broke apart during re-entry in 2003. It is estimated that the space shuttle programme has cost about $170 billion (£112 billion) up to 2008. This works out to an average cost per flight of about $1.5 billion (£989.5 million).





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 11 January 2009 10:43 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Rob Bennett,

Beautiful Byron Bay 12/01/2009 00:37:53
Well there you go, the US will start to cut back on many projects like this through lack of finance and the terrible state of their economy that will plummet for many years to come due to the Bush government's incompetence. This is one area where the Chinese will accelerate and surpass the Americans and probably begin to work closer with the Russians.
2

Graeme Gibson,

Sydney Australia 12/01/2009 04:14:06
Theres an evil about NASA that I cant quite grasp.
The earth is dying from the greed and destruction of mankind and there is NASA trying to escape the earth to colonise other worlds.
I would rather see their much-needed scientists turn around and start to get involved in saving the planet rather than deserting it.
The other planets are too far away to colonise in the time left, before the planet here dies.
Surely they are bright enough to see this?
3

,

12/01/2009 06:26:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Graeme Gibson,

Sydney Australia 12/01/2009 06:41:30
Thanks Scott. I will keep a copy of Operation Paperclip.
Have you seen Stan Deyos THE COSMIC CONSPIRACY? (c/- Millenium Ark)
Its getting an old book now (late 70's) but he suggests the New World Order could be building electric flying discs...UFOs flying saucers. I guess we will know if suddenly our (supposedly) 'long-lost' ancestors from another planet turn up offering wonderful new tech... and all we have to do to get to the tech is follow them. Sometimes shonky men will try to sell other men just about anything to get them to follow them.
5

BorderLineScottish,

12/01/2009 10:05:28
NASA needs to find out more about the Moon, as it hold the key to life having developed on this planet. Without it, and it's stabalising influences, there would be no life on Earth.

I believe they want to get to the stage were they can put a Moon-like satellite around a suitable planet and take it from there.

Let's face it, the way this planet is going, we will need to leave it before we wipe ourselves out of existence.
6

St Caledonia,

12/01/2009 10:48:53
NASA and it's men and women over the years must be commended for their efforts. We need people like them, if not for people like these we would still be living in caves.
The Earth is ours to use as we wish, we are not destorying it, we are merely doing what we must in order to get to the next planet before this one is obsolete.
Humans will be living in space in the next 50 years, we will colonise another planet, it may be empty, it may not - and when we do we will clone life in our image and begin the entire process again. Maybe we will stick about on this new planet or maybe we will leave never to return and have the locals write books about us revering us as gods, who knows.
But one thing is for sure, NASA is important, if not for them there would be no microwave ovens, new metals, new alloys and a host of other amazing innovations we use in every day life.
I support NASA because I respect people with minds such as theirs.
7

,

12/01/2009 10:49:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

,

12/01/2009 10:49:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
9

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 12/01/2009 11:12:01
There was life on Earth before the Moon arrived. As mentioned in fairly creditable human records. How either planet was created is an ever present contentious issue.

Yet we've always lived in Space. And if we can't live on this planet, the prospects aren't good for moving elsewhere. It's our best hope, and the only hope for most of us.
10

,

12/01/2009 12:15:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

Number 6,

Germany 12/01/2009 14:11:49
hysterical that we talk of moving to another planet when we still can't get off the launch pad with any
degree of certainty.

This is , or I should say, was , all fantasy. The space programm in the west is finished. Only the Chinese , with Russian help are capable of going forward in space.

The benefits "Velcro" "Teflon" Micro-wave ovens (Yawn)
have come with a trillion dollar price tag, not to mention quite a few deaths.

We really should learn to walk before we can run. As for escaping the planet, what utter gibberish. It takes a collosal ship to move a handful of people into space , how on earth would we evacuate any appreciatable number of people?.

Let's try and save what's left of this planet before it's too late because we dont have another one to go to
and never will.
12

ddmc,

12/01/2009 14:23:46
#6 microwave effects on food were discovered by accident when a radar researcher melted his bar of chocolate in the 1940's, NASA was born in 1957 i think so you can't credit them with microwave ovens.

13

ddmc,

12/01/2009 14:25:06
#11 the funniest story I think is that Nasa spent an estimated $3million making a pen that could write in zero gravity for the astronauts to use, the USSR took pencils !
14

exptscot,

montreal 12/01/2009 14:51:15
#9...are you serious or genuinely seriously mentally challenged?
15

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 12/01/2009 15:41:08
Velikovsky opened doors in thinking. Why the solar system is. People with a better scientific training are taking his ideas forward.
16

Lanna,

12/01/2009 16:09:12
#13
yeh, that's the trouble with spoiled scientists and the freeflow of the funding without accountability, it tends to inhibit out-side of the box thinking
17

Ofner,

Scotland 12/01/2009 16:10:00
Well if they stopped lying about other countries having WMD then invading them with the purpose of installing American compliant puppet governments they could divert all the money and technology to something that could benefit humanity!

We will have to leave cradle Earth sometime if the race is to survive in the long term, space travel is a good investment.
18

Selgovae,

12/01/2009 20:09:06
#13 "the funniest story"

It would be funny if it were true. But it isn't.

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/613/1




19

Taz,

The Land of the Free. 12/01/2009 20:53:29
Re: Well there you go, the US will start to cut back on many projects like this through lack of finance and the terrible state of their economy that will plummet for many years to come due to the Bush government's incompetence. This is one area where the Chinese will accelerate and surpass the Americans and probably begin to work closer with the Russians.
.........................................

Thank you Nostradamous.
20

Taz,

The Land of the Free 12/01/2009 20:56:31
Re: Theres an evil about NASA that I cant quite grasp.
The earth is dying from the greed and destruction of mankind and there is NASA trying to escape the earth to colonise other worlds.
I would rather see their much-needed scientists turn around and start to get involved in saving the planet rather than deserting it.
The other planets are too far away to colonise in the time left, before the planet here dies.
Surely they are bright enough to see this?
...........................................

Naaa we ain't as smart as you Einstein.
21

Taz,

The Land of the Free. 12/01/2009 21:00:53
Re" Well if they stopped lying about other countries having WMD then invading them with the purpose of installing American compliant puppet governments they could divert all the money and technology to something that could benefit humanity!
..................................

That WMD Intel came from you lot. If you don't know what you're talking about I suggest you be quiet. That way people will never know just how stupid you are.

22

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 12/01/2009 21:50:15
NASA to its credit did broadcast a new global view of this planet. Whether that was its intention or that it was mainly a military project isn't the important consequence.

It's where you are, what we are, and the sting to get organised that will matter.

23

Graeme Gibson,

Sydney Australia 13/01/2009 01:54:58
Wow Scott.
Thats some site.
Take me weeks to go through it all:)
Hope you dont mind but Im a christian and Im into visions and prophecies of an invader to Asia/Australasia.
My site is http://whatwillbecomeofaustraliajackburrell.blogspot.com/
China builds today for an outward march...Im convinced of it...and I like to expose it.
Theres some really heavy stuff around on the net like A.C.Valdez's 1929 vision. You need to be strong for it though.

24

Ofner,

Scotland 13/01/2009 14:52:34
Post#21 Taz, The Land Israel rules as its slave state


Your comment is somewhat perplexing, Georgie Bush supplied Blair with the lies of WMD in Iraq!
25

Saint, M.,

Houston, Texas, USA 15/01/2009 10:48:19
TO: Graeme Gibson of Sydney Australia.

It appears that you lack a true understanding of the space program and how it benefits mankind. You seem to believe that NASA is only out to colonize other planets and you refer to these missions as "escaping" from Earth. You even go as far as to say that NASA is "evil." I find this so completely & utterly disconnected from the TRUTH that I must speak up to direct you to a website that can broaden your mind about space science & how it serves every inhabitant of EARTH, not only humans but every living organism. Please take a look at the NASA.gov website & do some exploration for yourself. Only then will you be able to grasp the significant contributions that NASA had made for all of us, not just the current inhabitants of our planet, but for generations to come. It's all about the Little Blue Dot. It always has been.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.