Author Topic: Trump Space Policy Directive 1  (Read 34866 times)

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6539
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6244
  • Likes Given: 1878
Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« on: 12/11/2017 05:57 AM »
Quote
TRUMP TO SIGN SPACE POLICY DIRECTIVE TOMORROW
By Marcia Smith | Posted: December 10, 2017 11:04 pm ET | Last Updated: December 10, 2017 11:06 pm ET

President Trump will sign Space Policy Directive 1 at 3:00 pm tomorrow at a White House ceremony.  The directive apparently will make a human return to the lunar surface part of U.S. space policy.

https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/trump-to-sign-space-policy-directive-tomorrow/

Discussion of implications for, and current status of, Bridenstine’s confirmation:
http://nasawatch.com/archives/2017/12/confirming-the.html

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10637
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7495
  • Likes Given: 5263
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #1 on: 12/11/2017 06:23 AM »
moon mars moon mars asteroid mars moon.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline hektor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1352
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #2 on: 12/11/2017 08:28 AM »
I think the article jumps to conclusions a bit quickly

The directive text according to the article says : “We shall lead an innovative and sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system to bring new knowledge and opportunities. Beginning with missions beyond low Earth orbit, the United States will lead to return humans to the Moon for  long term exploration followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations.”

Nowhere it is said “to the Moon surface” in this alleged text. You can make the case that having extended stays at the Deep Space Gateway is “returning humans to the Moon”.

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4419
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 1174
  • Likes Given: 2250
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #3 on: 12/11/2017 10:14 AM »
Constellation or no Constellation: I believe it was very wrong to redirect America away from the Moon after Obama made his - essentially - 'been there; done that' statements. It's one of the few things I wont forgive him for. But since I'm not an American voter; I'm fully aware that my annoyance for that is impotent :'(

It is what it is. People like me are 'Space Cadets'. Even if intended to be pejorative - I'd still wear that label with pride...
« Last Edit: 12/11/2017 10:14 AM by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6539
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6244
  • Likes Given: 1878
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #4 on: 12/11/2017 10:16 AM »
Here's Jeff Foust's write-up:

http://spacenews.com/president-to-sign-space-policy-directive-monday/

He cites a different VP quote from October (my emphasis):

Quote
“We will return American astronauts to the moon, not only to leave behind footprints and flags, but to build the foundation we need to send Americans to Mars and beyond,”

My take is that the current administration will want to be seen to be doing more than has been done before. So I think surface ops on the moon will be an integral part of that.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6539
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6244
  • Likes Given: 1878
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #5 on: 12/11/2017 10:55 AM »
The usual issue to remember whatever is announced today, in a reply to Jeff Foust's tweet:

Quote
Depending on what this is, probably it's politically toothless. Congress would need to authorize and fund.

https://twitter.com/WordsmithFL/status/940185430477111296

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4419
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 1174
  • Likes Given: 2250
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #6 on: 12/11/2017 10:58 AM »
So; the more things change; the more they... :(
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6233
  • Liked: 4056
  • Likes Given: 5567
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #7 on: 12/11/2017 12:01 PM »
So; the more things change; the more they... :(

Nothing is more a constant than politicians rushing to get out in front of a movement to claim 'leadership' -- except maybe spending other peoples' money in their district to buy influence.  This could be a perfect storm of both base reactions.  Or not.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8492
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4977
  • Likes Given: 1585
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #8 on: 12/11/2017 12:06 PM »
Constellation or no Constellation: I believe it was very wrong to redirect America away from the Moon after Obama made his - essentially - 'been there; done that' statements. It's one of the few things I wont forgive him for. But since I'm not an American voter; I'm fully aware that my annoyance for that is impotent :'(

It is what it is. People like me are 'Space Cadets'. Even if intended to be pejorative - I'd still wear that label with pride...
Wrong. The guy you have to blame is named Nixon, not Obama. Nixon is the one that steered the USA away from the Moon, all the way back to LEO. And once the USA was stuck there, courtesy of the space shuttle and the space station sucking the NASA budget dry, there was no real chance of going back into deep space.

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8492
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4977
  • Likes Given: 1585
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #9 on: 12/11/2017 12:09 PM »
So; the more things change; the more they... :(

...stay the same.

Nothing to see here folks. Move along. And let's shut this thread down to prevent yet another lenghty episode of teeth gnashing (over the USA not going anywhere in space).

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6539
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6244
  • Likes Given: 1878
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #10 on: 12/11/2017 12:28 PM »
Quote
NASA tells me that -- at the moment at least -- although NASA TV will be at the 3:00 pm ET White House event, the signing is not live, so video won't be available till later. For live coverage, I'm advised that NASA's social medial outlets are the best bet.

https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/940210095429910530

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4419
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 1174
  • Likes Given: 2250
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #11 on: 12/11/2017 12:48 PM »
Constellation or no Constellation: I believe it was very wrong to redirect America away from the Moon after Obama made his - essentially - 'been there; done that' statements. It's one of the few things I wont forgive him for. But since I'm not an American voter; I'm fully aware that my annoyance for that is impotent :'(

It is what it is. People like me are 'Space Cadets'. Even if intended to be pejorative - I'd still wear that label with pride...
Wrong. The guy you have to blame is named Nixon, not Obama. Nixon is the one that steered the USA away from the Moon, all the way back to LEO. And once the USA was stuck there, courtesy of the space shuttle and the space station sucking the NASA budget dry, there was no real chance of going back into deep space.
Most of us are well aware of the Nixon era history and it's context - but I was not speaking about that era - at all. The GW Bush and Obama years are a whole different beast; and that is established fact. There were several options open to Nixon; continue Apollo Lunar and possibly expand it, go with the Shuttle and the Space Station and LEO, or go with the third option - Shuttle alone. And that's what we got. The GW Bush and Obama era was a chance to erase that mistake and the errors after Challenger & Columbia But some errors continued onwards, regardless. Constellation could have been pragmatically altered - not bloody cancelled outright.
« Last Edit: 01/15/2018 09:47 PM by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6233
  • Liked: 4056
  • Likes Given: 5567
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #12 on: 12/11/2017 12:51 PM »
Nowhere it is said “to the Moon surface” in this alleged text. You can make the case that having extended stays at the Deep Space Gateway is “returning humans to the Moon”.

The inside-DC gossip is that the above has been the crux of an argument between the White House and NASA. NASA has been trying to argue that the Deep Space Gateway (which they may be renaming to put "Moon" into the title) answers the policy directive, but people over in the executive branch are saying "No, we mean the surface of the Moon."

I can totally see the NASA perspective on this--administrations come and go, and do they really want to get all worked up on designing a lunar surface architecture when a little over three years from now a different administration could say "Forget that stuff"?

There will always be another administration (hopefully), so why not do nothing?
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6683
  • Liked: 981
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #13 on: 12/11/2017 12:54 PM »
Constellation or no Constellation: I believe it was very wrong to redirect America away from the Moon after Obama made his - essentially - 'been there; done that' statements. It's one of the few things I wont forgive him for.

I agreed with him.  I see no good reason to go back to the moon.  I don't see it as the first step to going to Mars either.  Same with SpaceX's mars plans.

It's all kind of depressing to me.  I want to see people on Mars but I don't think either commercial entity or NASA are on a path to get there in a safe and sustainable fashion.

Offline Jeff Lerner

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
  • Toronto, Canada
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #14 on: 12/11/2017 01:00 PM »
Anyhoooooo....unless Congress comes up with the funding nothing will change ...like woods170 said, nothing to see here...

Online john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 1164
  • Likes Given: 7815
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #15 on: 12/11/2017 01:46 PM »
Wrong. The guy you have to blame is named Nixon, not Obama. Nixon is the one that steered the USA away from the Moon, all the way back to LEO. And once the USA was stuck there, courtesy of the space shuttle and the space station sucking the NASA budget dry, there was no real chance of going back into deep space.
Say what you like about 'ol TD but (sadly) he sure did know how to hold a grudge.
BFS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of flying in Earth and Mars atmospheres. BFR. The worlds biggest Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured booster for BFS. First flight to Mars by end of 2022. Forward looking statements. T&C apply. Believe no one. Run your own numbers. So, you are going to Mars to start a better life? Picture it in your mind. Now say what it is out loud.

Online john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 1164
  • Likes Given: 7815
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #16 on: 12/11/2017 02:01 PM »
Quote
TRUMP TO SIGN SPACE POLICY DIRECTIVE TOMORROW
By Marcia Smith | Posted: December 10, 2017 11:04 pm ET | Last Updated: December 10, 2017 11:06 pm ET

President Trump will sign Space Policy Directive 1 at 3:00 pm tomorrow at a White House ceremony.  The directive apparently will make a human return to the lunar surface part of U.S. space policy.

https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/trump-to-sign-space-policy-directive-tomorrow/

Discussion of implications for, and current status of, Bridenstine’s confirmation:
http://nasawatch.com/archives/2017/12/confirming-the.html
I started a thread  around the time it was known Trump had won asking if anyone had any idea what his views on space were.

It seems we now have an answer. 

The inside-DC gossip is that the above has been the crux of an argument between the White House and NASA. NASA has been trying to argue that the Deep Space Gateway (which they may be renaming to put "Moon" into the title) answers the policy directive, but people over in the executive branch are saying "No, we mean the surface of the Moon."

I can totally see the NASA perspective on this--administrations come and go, and do they really want to get all worked up on designing a lunar surface architecture when a little over three years from now a different administration could say "Forget that stuff"?
But "Deep Space Gateway" doesn't sound very Moon specific, does it? Now something like "Cis-Lunar Deep Space Gateway" does sound more in keeping.

Except it seems that won't cut it if the WH is really saying "We mean the lunar surface."
I think that's a bit more specific from the White House about space than we've seen for some time.  :(

I admit I'm not really convinced it's worth the effort. Long duration testing could just as easily be done on the ISS, or a "free flyer" near the ISS before going to Mars IMHO and there are a number of issues that it would be better finding out about than going to the Moon (like radiation and zero-g adaptation mitigations for deep space flights in general).

But here's the real question.

When (and how much) money is Congress going to appropriate for these tasks?

Allocation without appropriation is meaningless.  :(

How much are Congress putting on the table for this?
BFS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of flying in Earth and Mars atmospheres. BFR. The worlds biggest Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured booster for BFS. First flight to Mars by end of 2022. Forward looking statements. T&C apply. Believe no one. Run your own numbers. So, you are going to Mars to start a better life? Picture it in your mind. Now say what it is out loud.

Offline hektor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1352
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #17 on: 12/11/2017 02:53 PM »

The inside-DC gossip is that the above has been the crux of an argument between the White House and NASA. NASA has been trying to argue that the Deep Space Gateway (which they may be renaming to put "Moon" into the title) answers the policy directive, but people over in the executive branch are saying "No, we mean the surface of the Moon."


I can well imagine Gerst making this case. But then, why doesn’t the White House close the discussion by making the policy more explicit, adding the word surface for instance.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8846
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2796
  • Likes Given: 7344
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #18 on: 12/11/2017 03:10 PM »
The usually "fiscally obsessed" Republicans seemed to have lost their way and with a president who doesn't care about debt, it will be interesting how this will pan out in these "unusual times"...
« Last Edit: 12/11/2017 03:50 PM by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator, Vintage auto racer

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2512
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 1288
  • Likes Given: 993
Re: Trump Space Policy Directive 1
« Reply #19 on: 12/11/2017 03:27 PM »
The usually "fiscally obsessed" Republicans seemed to have lost their way and with a president who doesn't care about debt, it will be interesting how this will pan out in these unusual times"...

The previous Republican administration dramatically increased the national debt. While some Republicans are still concerned with the debt, the 21st century Republican Party as a whole gave up on being fiscally conservative. They give it lip service and try to cut Democrat favored programs, but they reduce revenue and increase the programs they like.

That said, NASA already has a large budget and I doubt Congress will give them more money.

Tags: