Thursday
Jan252018

Slightly Used Sputnik

The White House has suggested Nasa need to do more.  And with that goal in mind they seem to be floating the idea of ending ISS (international space station) support by 2025 in order to restructure Nasa's budget priorities in a way that liquidates 2.08 billion a year.       

I can't say I'm in love with the idea.  Minus US support that turns the ISS into what, a new sputnik?  The US, at present, barely has human survivable orbital rocketry, apologies Tesla, the future isn't quite here yet and your track record proves it.  (MAR 20 2018 UPDATE:  Falcon rockets are beautiful +15 points and powerful +15 points, but you didn't land all 3 stages (-5 points) and didn't hit your indended orbit -25 points.  And what a show +1 points.  So all total, thats +1 step forward at least.  Oh, I hasten to include I'm not the Dustan Doud that works for SpaceX- such a common name - there are so many of us - nope I'm totally some other guy.)

The notion that we can build a moon base for somewhere around 16 billion dollars liquidated from an international pledged treaty in support of the ISS seems like a long con or recklessly numb skulled.  Sure that kind of money will buy seventy KC46 Boeing Pegasus jet fighters, but they won't be flying to the moon or setting up a base there. 

The White House has suggested Nasa need to do more.  And with that goal in mind they seem to be floating the idea of ending ISS (international space station) support by 2025 in order to restructure Nasa's budget priorities in a way that liquidates 2.08 billion a year.       

I can't say I'm in love with the idea.  Minus US support that turns the ISS into what, a new sputnik?  The US, at present, barely has human survivable orbital rocketry, apologies Tesla, the future isn't quite here yet and your track record proves it.  

The notion that we can build a moon base for somewhere around 16 billion dollars liquidated from an international pledged treaty in support of the ISS seems like a long con or recklessly numb skulled.  Sure that kind of money will buy seventy KC46 Boeing Pegasus jet fighters, but they won't be flying to the moon.  

I estimate a cost of 3 billion dolars just for fuel to get two cargo containers (say filled with a robotic crane/arm/scoop, solar panels and dump-truck-dozer-forklift and regolith solar sinter brick maker) landed on the moon.  If a human base is going to be bigger than two cargo containers, the crane will be needed to start piling up & solar sintering regolith and moving/attaching/burying additional landed cargo containers... although a entirely robotic base could do without meter thick solar flare shielding well enough.  

The true cost of a lunar base reminds one of the cost of landing colonies in America circa 1500.  The US isn't going to win a 2020's lunar colonial land grab by playing mister miser.  

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
« The Sword of Damocles | Main | On The Bus to America's Future »