Obama aims to send astronauts to Mars orbit in 2030s
April 15, 2010
Mars. Image: NASA
President Barack Obama set a bold new course for the future of US space travel when he announced plans to send US astronauts into the orbit of Mars within the next three decades.
The US leader on Thursday also sought to quell a storm of outrage caused by earlier administration plans, vowing before NASA staff that he was "100 percent committed" to their mission and to the future of the US space agency.
"I believe that space exploration is not a luxury, it's not an afterthought in America's quest for a brighter future. It is an essential part of that quest," he told a crowd at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Obama made a whirlwind trip after stinging criticism of his decision to end the costly Constellation program, a project to return US astronauts to the moon.
Obama -- accompanied by astronaut Buzz Aldrin, the second man to set foot on the moon after Neil Armstrong in 1969 -- said his administration would pump six billion more dollars into the NASA budget over the next five years.
He also had specific ideas how it should be spent.
"We should attempt a return to the surface of the moon first, as previously planned. But I just have to say, pretty bluntly here, we've been there before. Buzz has been there," Obama said.
"There's a lot more of space to explore and a lot more to learn when we do," he said, to loud applause.
"By 2025 we expect new spacecraft designed for long journeys to allow us to begin the first ever crew missions beyond the moon into deep space.
"So, we'll start by sending astronauts to an asteroid for the first time in history. By the mid-2030s, I believe we can send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to earth, and a landing on Mars will follow."
In a nod to critics who say the new approach will costs jobs, Obama said he was retaining the Orion capsule segment of the Constellation project.
Obama said he had instructed NASA administrator Charles Bolden to design a rescue vehicle using technology already developed for the Orion capsule.
The United States would also invest some three billion dollars in research on a heavy-lift rocket to send crew capsules and supplies into deep space, with the design to be finalized by 2015.
Obama said his plan includes increasing "robotic exploration of the solar system, including a probe of the sun's atmosphere, new scouting missions to Mars and other destinations, and an advanced telescope to follow Hubble."
Obama also pledged the new plan would create some 2,500 jobs along Florida's so-called space coast in the next two years -- aiming to bring new hope to a region blighted by high unemployment.
Critics, including the first man on the moon Neil Armstrong, were upset by Obama's decision earlier this year to scrap the bloated and behind-schedule Constellation program.
The aging US space shuttle fleet, which carries astronauts to the International Space Station, is due to be grounded at the end of the year, leaving US astronauts to hitch rides on Russian spacecraft to orbiting station until a replacement is developed.
"Without the skill and experience that actual spacecraft operation provides, the USA is far too likely to be on a long downhill slide to mediocrity," Armstrong, 79, wrote in a letter co-signed by two other astronauts.
After the speech, leading Republicans went on the attack.
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas said Obama's vision for NASA "continues to leave America grounded," and complained that without a shuttle, US space flight options will depend on countries like Russia and China.
The plan "fails to guarantee American leadership in space and the American people and Congress will not settle for it," added Senator John Cornyn, also from Texas.
"President Kennedy opened the door to the new frontier," said another critic, Republican Congressman Rob Bishop, "but Obama has slammed it shut and thrown away the key." Bishop represents a district in the western state of Utah where part of Constellation's Ares I rocket was being made.
Obama however anticipated his critics. "We will actually reach space faster and more often under this new plan in ways that will help us improve our technological capacity and lower our costs," he said.
"Nobody is more committed to manned space flight, to human exploration of space, than I am. But we've got to do it in a smart way."
Some 1.9 billion dollars in Obama's plan would be dedicated to upgrading the Kennedy Space Center, which would also be in charge of NASA's commercial rocket venture.
(c) 2010 AFP
-
Obama revives capsule from canceled moon program
Apr 13, 2010 |
not rated yet |
0
-
NASA chief charts agency's shuttle-less future
Apr 08, 2010 |
not rated yet |
0
-
More Money, and a New Path to the Stars
Feb 02, 2010 |
not rated yet |
0
-
NASA: Good night moon, hello new rocket technology
Feb 01, 2010 |
not rated yet |
0
-
NASA to get more money, but must scratch moon plan
Jan 28, 2010 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Engineers build first sub-10-nm carbon nanotube transistor
Feb 01, 2012 |
4.9 / 5 (31) |
30
-
Something old, something new: Evolution and the structural divergence of duplicate genes
Jan 31, 2012 |
4.6 / 5 (7) |
1
-
The hidden nanoworld of ice crystals: Revealing the dynamic behavior of quasi-liquid layers
Jan 30, 2012 |
5 / 5 (3) |
1
-
Stock market network reveals investor clustering
Jan 27, 2012 |
3.9 / 5 (23) |
8
-
Of microchemistry and molecules: Electronic microfluidic device synthesizes biocompatible probes
Jan 26, 2012 |
5 / 5 (1) |
0
-
Scale of the Universe
2 hours ago
-
Titan's lack of impact craters
Feb 09, 2012
-
Real pictures of black hole eating a star?
Feb 08, 2012
-
Hypothetical way to travel faster than light, but not technically exceed lightspeed
Feb 06, 2012
-
How do scientists monitor the Sun's activity?
Feb 05, 2012
-
Search patterns in observational studies
Feb 05, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - General Astronomy
More news stories
NASA sees wide-eyed cyclone Jasmine
Cyclone Jasmine's eye has opened wider on NASA satellite imagery, as it moves through the Southern Pacific Ocean.
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
1 hour ago |
not rated yet |
0
NASA sees Giovanna reach cyclone strength, threaten Madagascar
Tropical Storm 12S built up steam and became a cyclone on February 10, 2012 as NASA's Terra satellite passed overhead. Residents of east-central Madagascar should prepare for this cyclone to make landfall ...
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
1 hour ago |
not rated yet |
0
Humans may have helped the decline of African rainforests 3000 years ago
(PhysOrg.com) -- Large areas of rainforests in Central Africa mysteriously disappeared over three thousand years ago, to be replaced by savannas. The prevailing theory has been that the cause was a change ...
Could Venus be shifting gear?
(PhysOrg.com) -- ESAs Venus Express spacecraft has discovered that our cloud-covered neighbour spins a little slower than previously measured. Peering through the dense atmosphere in the infrared, the ...
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
9 hours ago |
5 / 5 (7) |
7
|
Mars Science Laboratory computer issue resolved
(PhysOrg.com) -- Engineers have found the root cause of a computer reset that occurred two months ago on NASA's Mars Science Laboratory and have determined how to correct it.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
10 hours ago |
4.7 / 5 (6) |
3
|
Google users warned of threat to smartphone wallets
Users of Google smartphone wallets were being warned on Friday that there is a way to crack pass codes intended to thwart thieves from going on illicit shopping sprees.
CIA website offline, Anonymous takes credit
The website of the Central Intelligence Agency was unresponsive on Friday after the hacker group Anonymous claimed to have knocked it offline.
Complex wiring of the nervous system may rely on a just a handful of genes and proteins
Researchers at the Salk Institute have discovered a startling feature of early brain development that helps to explain how complex neuron wiring patterns are programmed using just a handful of critical genes. ...
Putting the squeeze on planets outside our solar system
(PhysOrg.com) -- Using high-powered lasers, scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and collaborators discovered that molten magnesium silicate undergoes a phase change in the liquid state, abruptly ...
The power of estrogen -- male snakes attract other males
A new study has shown that boosting the estrogen levels of male garter snakes causes them to secrete the same pheromones that females use to attract suitors, and turned the males into just about the sexiest ...
New error-correcting codes guarantee the fastest possible rate of data transmission
Error-correcting codes are one of the triumphs of the digital age. Theyre a way of encoding information so that it can be transmitted across a communication channel such as an optical fiber o ...
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (17)
http://www.msnbc....36470363
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (13)
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (19)
Money must be spent on new tech! Cheaper orbit accesss (Skylon? Lightcraft?) and FAST methods to reach other planets, like VASIMR!
Investing in 1960s tech is idiotic...
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 3.4 / 5 (11)
I hope he's wrong, we dont need to wait that long. I sincerely hope someone else beats us there if we are really going to wait that long.
I mean, Jesus!! We should already have a colony on Mars by now. We sent me to the moon with 1960s technology, and we have come a long way. The fact of the matter is, if it doesn;t have military applications they won't touch it. The moon landing was the beginnings of the cold war. Oh well, money and power always rules over knowledge and self improvement. Maybe in the next 1000 years humans will get their priorities straight.
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (5)
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 2 / 5 (3)
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 3.3 / 5 (3)
Though i would agree that it is a shame that constellation programs and such were canceled. But i do believe that what Obama is doing is consolidating our smarty pants together to get more things done (streamline).
It's like the military. How do you expect to conquer if your resources are spread thin?
Though i do wonder what research in global environment would do for us. It may be great to know definitively that us humans are destroying our planet...but if the whole world doesn't support in change, will significant change occur? This is the United States of America not United States of the World. Though it sometimes seems that way when we are giving aid left and right :P
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (6)
NASA should be focusing on developing advanced propulsion not building old-fashioned super-expensive chemical rockets.
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (5)
1) Build a space elevator. That will probably take one or more launches of Obama's proposed heavy launch vehicle. Fine.
2) Build one or more real space ships, these will be crewed vehicles with essentially steady-state life support systems, and bolt on fuel tanks and engines for specific trips. (Assuming high Isp engines such as plasma, or ion engines, fuel determines total delta v, while the number of engines determines how fast the fuel can be used.)
3) For any moon or planet you want to visit, choose between a temporary space elevator, a permanent space elevator, or a shuttle. Lunar elevators can be built through the L1 or L2 Lagrange points, we could build a (highly practical) space elevator today for the moon or Mars, but the technology (carbon nanotubes meters long) necessary for a practical earth space elevator will make those elevators trivial. Mercury and Venus are not candidates for space elevators.
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 3.3 / 5 (4)
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 2.5 / 5 (4)
Can you give just one example of such an "unspeakable" military advantage? And who besides you is so paranoid of such future evil, powerful countries?
Cost-effectiveness is the biggest factor. Eg, the reason a missile defense shield cannot defend against a large attack is because an enemy will be able to build 10 more missiles at the same cost of only one more of our defense missiles.
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (7)
I just don't see how advanced propulsion can help real people on planet earth. 50 years from now when everyone is disease free and not killing each other, maybe. But at the moment there are plenty of problems right here at home to fix that won't cost nearly as much.
How many billions of people are starving, while others are talking about colonizing Mars with only a few people? On the thousands-of-years timescale of human civilization, Mars can wait another dozen years, at least.
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Are NASA jobs somehow better for the economy than other kinds of jobs? Even if that's true, then how about planning even further ahead and making accessability to higher education our priority? China's already producing more engineers than us. That's where we're really falling behind.
It's all about choosing the right priorities, first, which includes reality checks wrt what's the most strategically cost-effective.
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 4.8 / 5 (6)
Apr 15, 2010
Rank: 4.7 / 5 (7)
Had funding for Apollo continued Saturn Vs would have been used to launch the components of the vehicle that would have gone to Mars . . . in 1986.
There is nothing, not even today, that can match the boost capacity of the F-1s on the Saturn V 1st Stage. If built today with modern weight saving components it would achieve Single Stage to Orbit.
God Bless Wernher Von Braun.
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (4)
Not unless you get on the board of directors at a reputable University.
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 3.6 / 5 (8)
our species wide ego-centric brain functions and delusions of self importance make us "need" to send a man there, and have a hero to welcome home.
Why can't the hero be a nerd at a desk at Kennedy Space Center in Florida instead of some ex fighter jock with a hero complex sitting on top of a really large phallic platform?
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 2.4 / 5 (5)
The money should be used for robots and not for expensive lifesupport systems. We dont need a couple of guys watching Mars from afar...
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
Greed has always been the most effective force for expansion and colonization.
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 2.5 / 5 (4)
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 1.8 / 5 (5)
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (10)
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
Wasn't he a Nazi? lol
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 3.6 / 5 (5)
When both NASA and the Chinese said they would put men on the moon around 2020, guess which one people believed?
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (9)
NAZI? Maybe. I don't know. I wasn't there.
But, more importantly, if not for him, we still would not have landed on the moon. All the rockets used today are his "disintegrating totem poles", the shuttle being the furthest derivation from the V2.
And had we followed his roadmap we would have been on Mars in the middle to late 80's.
Obama isn't from Kenya but he is a Marxist, no question about it. And if you don't see it you're either uneducated, lying or a fool. Lotsa useful idiots in the world, I tell you what.
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (9)
Spend that money on research into fusion power, nanotech or into green energy or something useful. Not going to some rock that isn't going to do anything for you at all (at least it won't do anything right away).
In fact I think this is just a pretext so that obama has an excuse when he makes a bunch more of your tax dollars -- he'll take it to run a police state but say he's spending it on the moon.
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 4.6 / 5 (9)
Yes, because what NASA does (especially with a manned program) inspires people. It inspires kids to take up maths, physics, chemistry, ... and that is where the future is. Not in crop subsidies but in the innovation and new products that come from people who are genuinely curious and driven by their dreams.
If you don't fuel the dreams then the US will just be another background country in no time getting bogged down in small things and generally losing all its advantages over time - until all it has left that makes people take notice of it are its nukes.
Oh wait. That's how it is right now, already. Never mind.
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (3)
Cold robots and mentally unbalanced Astronaut scandals?
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 2.1 / 5 (7)
What is the benefit of putting people in orbit around Mars??? NONE, unless there is some hidden agenda that we are not privy to. What could that be? ??
Is it better, scientifically, than what we are doing now? NO, unless there is some hidden agenda.
BO's announcement is just more political BS and not unlike Bush's announcement we're going back to the moon. Both were/are pandering to a class of voters.
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (6)
On a scientific note, we need to merge all of earths space agencies into, after long last, STARFLEET. Seriously, let's stop competing with each other and stop seeing us as U.S. vs. China vs. etc. Let's get humans to mars by combining materials and funding from the entire globe. Let's start acting like a species who is ready to begin space exploration.
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (2)
I'd hate to be in one with a big ass asteroid screaming at me through space and having to wait on some 3" "thruster" to move my butt out of the way...although in space, with no lift, sideways movement on the shuttle is probably similar to a lander...
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Apr 16, 2010
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (5)
Apr 17, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Regarding the asteroids: They are TREASURE troves! Diamonds? Gold? Nah, WATER, iron, platimun group materials and basic regolith that can be turned into...CEMENT! Think about it (and also check out NASA's own studies for the last decade). Water delivered from the Earth costs USD $10,000 per pound (about a pint), but about $1 from a near-Earth asteroid/comet. Also, on Earth, we are rapidly running out of platinum-group metals, which are in abundance in many asteroids. Check out 4Frontiers on the web for additional information. CEMENT?! am I crazy? Nah, cement can and should be used to build space vessels. It offers strong protection from micrometeroids and radiation. ...more later...
Apr 17, 2010
Rank: 1.8 / 5 (5)
Apr 17, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
On top of all that, college tuition has been on the rise. How do we expect higher education when schools are operating like businesses (for profit).
I can't believe some people would consider space exploration a waste. Space exploration will give us many opportunities. I.E.: How our bodies function in zero gravity; Collect materials outside of earth; research of the cosmos when clouds aren't in the way; provide more effective solar power or thermal power; thinking out of the box and outside of earth boundaries.
Apr 17, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
@acmetech,
I can think of one, by the way, it's Robert A. Heinlein's idea in his book "the Moon is a harsh Mistress". Basically you can use mass drivers built on the Moon and lobe big rocks anywhere on Earth if wished. The low gravity of the Moon and no atmosphere will make it so much easier and cheap. You only need a minimum amount of metal around your rocks to get propelled by the mass driver, and perhaps some ablative shielding to get them through the Earth atmosphere at Mach 25+. (The gain in speed is free, since the rocks are falling into the earth's gravity well). At that sort of speed and the kinetic energy that comes with it, who needs nuclear weapons? Every billions-dollars-each missile launched from Earth or LEO will be countered by hundreds of cheap rocks. Can you see how one-sided the fight would be?
Apr 17, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
But more importantly, the imperatives are: protecting the planet from impacts and establishing self-sustaining colonies elsewhere, because the species is vulnerable to extinction where it is. The quicker we can get to mars and stay there the better. In 12 years there will only be that many more starving people; there will always be starving people until we can destroy the obsolete cultures which result in them. Obamas plan is a good thing.
Apr 18, 2010
Rank: 3 / 5 (1)
Very interesting. I haven't thought of the outer orbits as higher ground than the Moon. It seems the Obama's administration is not sleeping after all. If someone put hostile bases on the Moon, they theoretically can be neutralized by the higher ground from the asteroids (belt). The problems are, the only readily available asteroids are from The Belt beyond Mars's orbit. The response times will be a bitch to arrange for speedily counter to hostile Moon launches.It would be doable if we are one steps ahead of any hostile forces(set the program up quickly!) and marshal lots of rocks into Eath-Moon-approaching orbits, or Luna's orbits ready to go. However, they will require stealth tech shields covering them to avoid detection.
Apr 18, 2010
Rank: 4.7 / 5 (3)
Apr 19, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Not really. He killed some minor things to put forth out l,anding on an asteroid by 2015 and be in mars orbit by 2030. The goal of halting current projects is to refocus NASA on building long range vessels and projects with the future goals in mind. This is actually much more ambicious then the plans that were scrapped.
If we actually land on an asteroid in 2015, he will go down in history as being commended for the change....
Apr 19, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
The argument that we need to see if we can do it is redundant. We obviously can.
Apr 19, 2010
Rank: 2 / 5 (2)
There is no free gain. Not only to do have to escape the moon you have to deorbit the rocks!
Apr 19, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Apr 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Good, the cards are in place, all you needed are the players.:-)
Apr 20, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Apr 28, 2010
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
That is a load of crap. Try 39 days--maybe.
And, one other thing: How are we going to get astronauts onto that VASIMIR powered vahicle? VASIMIR-based ships cannot leave the surface of the earth. Without a functional space elevator we are stuck with chemical rocket or related technology just to get astronauts into LEO where they can dock with such a VASIMIR-based vehicle. Cutting a program that gets us into space is a ridiculous waste of already-spent moneys. It's either that or we hitch rides from other space-faring nations for a fee. :)