Quote from: yg1968HLS-Starship was selected under the base period in April 2020. Option A was selected in April 2021. But Starship couldn't have been selected for Option A if it hadn't been selected under the base period. Again: Spacenut stated that Bridenstine brought in Starship. That is categorically false. The selecting officer for the base period was Stephen Jurczyk. Bridenstine had no role in the selections made for both the Base Period and Option A. The fact that SpaceX opted to offer Starship for the NextSTEP H BAA, is not Bridenstine's accomplishment. The only thing Bridenstine accomplished was getting a competition started to select a lunar lander. So, you can only credit him with getting started on getting a lander ready.But getting certain companies to respond to the HLS competition, let alone getting them to offer specific solutions, is not Bridenstine's accomplishment. In fact, Bridenstine was not even allowed to do so. Because doing so would be a violation of the same stringent set of federal acquisition rules that eventually toppled Loverro.
HLS-Starship was selected under the base period in April 2020. Option A was selected in April 2021. But Starship couldn't have been selected for Option A if it hadn't been selected under the base period.
Quote from: yg1968 on 11/17/2022 01:50 pmQuote from: woods170 on 11/17/2022 01:39 pmQuote from: yg1968 on 11/17/2022 01:18 pmI am not sure that the Journey to Mars or Gateway are worth bragging about. The Journey to Mars was a Journey to no where. It didn't include the Moon which made it almost useless. In terms of taking credit for a program, any administration that participated in the program can claim credit for it. If anything it shows that a politician cares enough to even talk about it. In terms of lies or more accurately exaggerations, it's not like other politicians don't bend the truth or exaggerate either. Trump is just more obvious about it. Emphasis mine.Wrong. The Journey to Mars very much included the Moon, just not the lunar surface. But the prototype for the Mars Transfer Vehicle was the Deep Space Habitat (NextSTEP, which later was rebranded Lunar Gateway), which was planned from Day 1 to be tested near the Moon. Just look at NASA's description of the Journey To Mars:https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/journey-to-mars-next-steps-20151008_508.pdfAround the Moon isn't the same as on the surface of the Moon. In any event, I am not sure that I would brag about Gateway. I am somewhat supportive of Gateway because of the international collaboration that it brings but I am glad that Bridenstine decided to minimize it by reducing its scope (e.g., HALO is smaller than what was originally planned).Emphasis mine.This is again a misconception on your part. More than a year before Bridenstine got into office, NASA has already partnered with Orbital Sciences/Orbital ATK to use a Cygnus-based module as the initial habitat module (what we now know as HALO) for Deep Space Habitat, instead of the bigger ISS based modules offered by Boeing and LockMart.I strongly suggest you start reading up on the history of NextSTEP because your knowledge base is lacking.
Quote from: woods170 on 11/17/2022 01:39 pmQuote from: yg1968 on 11/17/2022 01:18 pmI am not sure that the Journey to Mars or Gateway are worth bragging about. The Journey to Mars was a Journey to no where. It didn't include the Moon which made it almost useless. In terms of taking credit for a program, any administration that participated in the program can claim credit for it. If anything it shows that a politician cares enough to even talk about it. In terms of lies or more accurately exaggerations, it's not like other politicians don't bend the truth or exaggerate either. Trump is just more obvious about it. Emphasis mine.Wrong. The Journey to Mars very much included the Moon, just not the lunar surface. But the prototype for the Mars Transfer Vehicle was the Deep Space Habitat (NextSTEP, which later was rebranded Lunar Gateway), which was planned from Day 1 to be tested near the Moon. Just look at NASA's description of the Journey To Mars:https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/journey-to-mars-next-steps-20151008_508.pdfAround the Moon isn't the same as on the surface of the Moon. In any event, I am not sure that I would brag about Gateway. I am somewhat supportive of Gateway because of the international collaboration that it brings but I am glad that Bridenstine decided to minimize it by reducing its scope (e.g., HALO is smaller than what was originally planned).
Quote from: yg1968 on 11/17/2022 01:18 pmI am not sure that the Journey to Mars or Gateway are worth bragging about. The Journey to Mars was a Journey to no where. It didn't include the Moon which made it almost useless. In terms of taking credit for a program, any administration that participated in the program can claim credit for it. If anything it shows that a politician cares enough to even talk about it. In terms of lies or more accurately exaggerations, it's not like other politicians don't bend the truth or exaggerate either. Trump is just more obvious about it. Emphasis mine.Wrong. The Journey to Mars very much included the Moon, just not the lunar surface. But the prototype for the Mars Transfer Vehicle was the Deep Space Habitat (NextSTEP, which later was rebranded Lunar Gateway), which was planned from Day 1 to be tested near the Moon. Just look at NASA's description of the Journey To Mars:https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/journey-to-mars-next-steps-20151008_508.pdf
I am not sure that the Journey to Mars or Gateway are worth bragging about. The Journey to Mars was a Journey to no where. It didn't include the Moon which made it almost useless. In terms of taking credit for a program, any administration that participated in the program can claim credit for it. If anything it shows that a politician cares enough to even talk about it. In terms of lies or more accurately exaggerations, it's not like other politicians don't bend the truth or exaggerate either. Trump is just more obvious about it.
The NextSTEP-2 Appendix A contractors’ concepts were assessed for potential use as a Minimal Habitat. Northrop Grumman was the only contractor with concepts and the development and production capability that met both requirements and schedule.
Quote from: page 237 of VP Pence's book"and I were encouraging NASA to do what our administration had done elsewhere -with the economy, on foreign policy: shrug off compliancy,
"and I were encouraging NASA to do what our administration had done elsewhere -with the economy, on foreign policy: shrug off compliancy,
I think that Trump prefers Mars than the Moon but he was probably told in 2017 that Mars wasn't possible before the end of 2024. However, Mars before the end of 2028 would be possible with Starship.
Nevertheless, the Trump tweet that you cited above does also mention the Moon, so I think that he also supported the Moon but preferred Mars as the ultimate goal.
"For all of the money we are spending, NASA should NOT be talking about going to the Moon — We did that 50 years ago. They should be focused on the much bigger things we are doing, including Mars (of which the Moon is a part), Defense and Science!"
As Pence mentioned in the quote above, Trump did say that rich guys loves rockets and if they can help NASA (get to the Moon or Mars), that is great.
NASA won't even be able to get back to the Moon by 2028, and you think NASA could get to Mars by then? I don't think you understand what it takes to go to Mars for NASA.SpaceX might indeed get to Mars by 2028, but that will have nothing to do with NASA, nor with Trump. Of course that wouldn't stop Trump from claiming credit, but Elon Musk is solely responsible for their Mars effort.Oh, and NASA getting back to the Moon this decade will only be possible because Elon Musk is committed to going to Mars. NASA would still be looking for an HLS system if SpaceX wasn't committing private funds to colonizing Mars.
We can only go by what Trump says, and he said:Quote"For all of the money we are spending, NASA should NOT be talking about going to the Moon — We did that 50 years ago. They should be focused on the much bigger things we are doing, including Mars (of which the Moon is a part), Defense and Science!"It is clear that Trump did not support NASA returning to the Moon, regardless how Pence and Bridenstine spun his comments.
Yeah, and look how much progress Bezos has made. Not much. He couldn't even win an HLS contract, and Blue Origin is part of the reason by the ULA Vulcan rocket is so behind schedule.It should be clear by now that the 2024 return-to-Moon date was a fake date, and no real thought was put into how to actually make that happen. So in that light Trump taking credit for NASA going to Mars adds nothing to the actual effort - which NASA has been working on for decades already.
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 11/17/2022 08:45 pmNASA won't even be able to get back to the Moon by 2028, and you think NASA could get to Mars by then? I don't think you understand what it takes to go to Mars for NASA.SpaceX might indeed get to Mars by 2028, but that will have nothing to do with NASA, nor with Trump. Of course that wouldn't stop Trump from claiming credit, but Elon Musk is solely responsible for their Mars effort.Oh, and NASA getting back to the Moon this decade will only be possible because Elon Musk is committed to going to Mars. NASA would still be looking for an HLS system if SpaceX wasn't committing private funds to colonizing Mars.If Trump creates a commercial crew to Mars program and SpaceX wins an award, of course Trump could take credit for it...
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 11/17/2022 08:45 pm...It should be clear by now that the 2024 return-to-Moon date was a fake date, and no real thought was put into how to actually make that happen. So in that light Trump taking credit for NASA going to Mars adds nothing to the actual effort - which NASA has been working on for decades already.It wasn't a fake date, Pence even considered using commercial rockets (in addition to SLS) to attain this goal (as mentioned in his March 2019 speech). Pence even repeats that in his book (see the quotes in my prior post). Shelby stopped him from doing so but it was being considered.
...It should be clear by now that the 2024 return-to-Moon date was a fake date, and no real thought was put into how to actually make that happen. So in that light Trump taking credit for NASA going to Mars adds nothing to the actual effort - which NASA has been working on for decades already.
Meanwhile a Space Launch System rocket would send Orion with an ascent vehicle to rendezvous with the Gateway where the full lander system would be docked together. [...]Gerstenmaier said the ascent vehicle might be developed using a more traditional approach where more NASA requirements are placed on the contractor.
The 2024 date was announced in 2019, not 2017. But even if the 2024 goal wasn't achieved, it doesn't really matter. The sense of urgency for the 2024 goal encouraged Pence to look at commercial alternatives to SLS.
Furthermore, HLS (Appendix H) was announced after Pence's March 2019 speech. As VSECOTSPE mentioned the 2024 date gave the program a kick in the pants. Before Pence's speech, for Appendix E, NASA was thinking about a 3 element lander where the ascent module was possibly going to be governmental (not good).
Which was, predictably for everyone who follows the SLS program, shut down quickly by Senator Shelby. It was the wrong way to go about replacing the SLS, if that was even the goal. The only way to "replace" the SLS was to cancel the program, and Pence never advocated for that.
The 2024 goal was announced during Pence's March 2019 speech at the National Space Council meeting, not in 2017. But even if the 2024 goal wasn't achieved, it doesn't really matter. The sense of urgency for the 2024 goal gave Artemis a kick in the pants. It encouraged Pence and Bridenstine to look at commercial alternatives to SLS for the first crewed landing.
See also these slides:https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_hls_baa_industry_forum_14feb2019.pdf
Quote from: deadman1204 on 11/16/2022 09:09 pm[deleted]Your comments are overly political, even for the policy section. But the Artemis/Moon to Mars program was initiated under the Trump Administration. The Mars portion of the Moon to Mars program is essentially a rebrand of the Journey to Mars but it was there nevertheless under the Trump Administration.
[deleted]
Mods please tell us what you count as acceptable political discussion?Its fact that politicians regardless of party are not always truthful. Its not possible to have a discussion about politics (which this entire thread/subsection is) without being able to judge the person making the statement.
Quote from: deadman1204 on 11/19/2022 11:38 pmMods please tell us what you count as acceptable political discussion?Its fact that politicians regardless of party are not always truthful. Its not possible to have a discussion about politics (which this entire thread/subsection is) without being able to judge the person making the statement.I am not a mod but it was already explained in this post:https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=57682.msg2431485#msg2431485General political comment is not allowed. Space policy comment is allowed.