
Pence: “America Will Return to the Moon–and Go Beyond” - thedevil
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/10/05/vice-president-mike-pence-america-will-return-moon%E2%80%94and-go-beyond
======
RikNieu
Yeah, I'll believe it when I see it. Every president since Bush said something
to this effect. My eyebrows will raise when NASAs budget does.

~~~
valuearb
NASA wants to spend over $2B per launch on a super heavy lift system called
the SLS, that can only lift about twice as much as a Falcon Heavy that costs
around $120M a launch.

Maybe it's not NASA's budget, but how it's spent?

~~~
nsxwolf
I don't have a good idea about how this scales. What would something with
twice the lift of the Falcon Heavy cost?

~~~
greglindahl
It costs 2 Falcon Heavy launches plus some work on on-orbit assembly.

------
bmcusick
> It means establishing a renewed American presence on the moon... > And from
> the foundation of the moon...

This is potentially bad news for SLS/Orion. They have no ability to land on
the Moon. SLS doesn't do retro-propulsion and Orion can only land on Earth's
ocean using heat shields and parachutes.

That's why NASA has pushed for asteroid missions and building a space station
around the Moon. Those are things that SLS can do.

Of course if the intention is to land on the moon this is very good news for
SpaceX and Blue Origin, both of whom have working retro-propulsion landings
under their belt. Arguably, Blue Origin is in an ever better position than
SpaceX since their New Shepard is about the right size for a moon lander.
SpaceX would have to develop one.

(Dragon 2 was originally supposed to do retro-propulsion landing, but NASA
nixed the idea of landing legs that extended from a heat shield, so the idea
was dropped. They would either have to develop a lander version of Dragon 2,
or wait until the BFS is available)

~~~
simonh
New Shepard far too big, with far too much delta V for a moon lander. It’s
design parameters are all wrong. Also SpaceX has a perfectly suitable
propulsion system in the SuperDracos.

The truth is none of the existing or currently planned systems, other than
BFR, would make any sense as lunar landers. They’re just not designed for it.
Dragon and Orion are Apollo Command Module replacements, not LEM replacements.
For lunar landings and excursions we’d need a new vehicle along the lines of
the LEM. Lightweight, vacuum only, reusable and refuelable with an
‘infinitely’ restartable engine. SLS would be perfectly capable of launching
such a vehicle, in fact that’s exactly the sort of thing it’s designed for.

~~~
randyrand
Why not just use the Saturn V designs? Are they that bad?

~~~
Inconel
As magnificent as the Apollo program was, and the Saturn V in particular, it
was an incredibly expensive and complex launch system, unsustainably so.

Additionally, even if you did want to recreate a Saturn V, the designs
themselves aren't going to get you very far. Most of the tooling has been lost
likely along with much of the institutional know how, especially on the
technician side of things. I'd be very surprised if you could recreate a
functioning Saturn V for a lower cost than designing an entirely new launch
system.

~~~
eesmith
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1#F-1B_booster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1#F-1B_booster)

> As part of the Space Launch System (SLS) program, NASA had been running the
> Advanced Booster Competition, which was scheduled to end with the selection
> of a winning booster configuration in 2015. In 2012, Pratt & Whitney
> Rocketdyne (PWR) proposed using a derivative of the F-1 engine in the
> competition as a liquid rocket booster ... The F-1B engine has a design goal
> to be at least as powerful as the un-flight-tested F-1A, while also being
> more cost effective.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_C-3#Pyrios](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_C-3#Pyrios)

> Developed during the later stages of the Apollo program, the F-1A was test
> fired, but never flew. Several were crated and stored by Rocketdyne (later
> Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne). The company has also maintained an F-1/F-1A
> knowledge retention program for its engineers for the entire period the
> engine has been mothballed.

Also, [https://arstechnica.com/science/2013/04/new-f-1b-rocket-
engi...](https://arstechnica.com/science/2013/04/new-f-1b-rocket-engine-
upgrades-apollo-era-deisgn-with-1-8m-lbs-of-thrust/) .

~~~
greglindahl
And this engine lost the SLS competition to the SSME+solids. So yes, it's an
interesting point that the Saturn V engine might still be buildable, but it's
not cost effective today, and it's not the Saturn V rocket.

------
thedevil
While this came out today, Pence also made similar statements in the summer.

[https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/vice-president-pence-
visi...](https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/vice-president-pence-visits-nasa-
s-multi-user-spaceport-kennedy-space-center)

Nonetheless, I think him repeating the claims a second time signals more
commitment.

~~~
mhneu
Slight issue:

Far more than past administrations, a huge number of things that come out of
Pence's mouth are straight-up lies.

He and the rest of the administration have demonstrated they will lie with
abandon to serve their own ends. We've long passed the point where we should
take anything at face value this administration (and this GOP congress as
well) says.

Mike Pence has a growing credibility problem:
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
fix/wp/2017/05/18/vi...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
fix/wp/2017/05/18/vice-president-pence-has-a-growing-credibility-problem/)

It's not just the Russia scandal, Pence lies about health care too:
[http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/its-not-just-the-
rus...](http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/its-not-just-the-russia-
scandal-pence-lies-about-health-care-too)

How can Mike Pence get away with outrageous lies about the health care bill?
[https://www.salon.com/2017/07/17/how-can-mike-pence-get-
away...](https://www.salon.com/2017/07/17/how-can-mike-pence-get-away-with-
outrageous-lies-about-the-health-care-bill/)

All False statements by Mike Pence
[http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mike-
pence/statement...](http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mike-
pence/statements/byruling/false/)

~~~
zghst
Also note that all of your sources are quite biased. This content all seems to
be written by people who describe themselves as opposition to the
administration and Pence. Salon of all of them is especially unreliable.

~~~
eesmith
Which news sources do you consider to be sufficiently unbiased that you
wouldn't need to make this caution?

------
scrumper
Para 1: revives NSC. A good thing, I think.

Para 2: China etc. threatening our military dominance... Uh oh, hope this
isn't going to a bad place.

Para 3: "We will refocus America’s space program toward human exploration and
discovery."

Yes, robots are more effective, but this is good, exciting, inspirational
stuff. If it happens. And at least he didn't say "We will refocus our efforts
towards military control of near-Earth orbit."

~~~
cgore
> "We will refocus our efforts towards military control of near-Earth orbit."

The US Space Corps is in the budget for 2018.

~~~
52-6F-62
Where can I see this? Do they seriously want to slip the 'star wars' back in?

edit: Thanks for the Wikipedia link. Those slippery weasels! That's the wrong
direction.

Apparently Russia's was reformed in 2015.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Space_Forces](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Space_Forces)

You've got to be kidding me.

edit again: Apparently this includes the US Space Command

>"HR2810 FY18 could re-establish the United States Space Command as a
subordinate unified command under the United States Strategic Command not
later than January 1, 2019. This bill also includes the creation of the United
States Space Corps."

~~~
sailfast
Yes, but:

> This proposal is opposed by the Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force, Air
> Force Space Command, and military leaders such as Secretary of Defense James
> Mattis, Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson, Vice Chairman of the
> Joint Chiefs of Staff General Paul Selva, Chief of Staff of the Air Force
> General David L. Goldfein, and the current commander of Air Force Space
> Command General John W. Raymond

Also, from a joint perspective it makes no sense to bring this to the level of
of Joint Chief. This would however be a perfect thing to talk about amongst
the Chiefs as it would involve resources and personnel from across the
services. I imagine that kind of thing is already happening, however.

~~~
52-6F-62
Thanks, I missed that. That is somewhat reassuring. My knowledge of this in
the present is limited, though.

------
eesmith
Quoting Charlie Stross, teller of lies for money and HN user, from
[http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2017/09/bread-
an...](http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2017/09/bread-and-circuses-
circumlunar.html) :

> I don't often make exact predictions about the future; that's not an SF
> writer's job, and it's really easy to get egg on your face. Howver, here's a
> prediction:

> If Donald Trump is still president, US astronauts will return to circumlunar
> space around July 16th, 2019 ...

> I'm making this a prediction, however, because the POTUS factor.

> July 2019 lies within the term in office of Donald Trump (or Mike Pence,
> depending whether impeachment/removal has happened first then). Trump is
> nothing if not an egomaniac, and offering him the opportunity to make a
> historic phone call to lunar orbit in front of the TV cameras is a
> guaranteed ego-stroke. Trump is of an age to have young-adult memories of
> Apollo and I can't see the idea not appealing to him if he can take credit
> for it.

------
excalibur
> Under President Trump, America will lead in space again.

We need to get Trump to lead the way to the moon personally. I heard Kim Jong
Un said he doesn't have what it takes.

~~~
craftyguy
Why stop him at the moon? I heard the Oort cloud has great golf courses.

------
moomin
No-one in their right mind would put paragraphs two and three next to one
another. The literal interpretation is "Our enemies are working to defeat us,
but we're going to completely ignore that".

In practice, I suspect that a policy around 2 is much more likely, but it
seems unlikely the money for that will be showing up in NASA's budgets.

This is proper Kremlinology stuff. What does it really mean? Could be anything
or nothing. Only those inside the loop know for sure. And that's subject to
change.

------
Animats
Sending a lunar rover to the Tranquility landing site for the 50th anniversary
of the manned moon landing would be a nice touch.

~~~
techdragon
You know what would be better, sending people back. Back to anywhere on the
moon at all.

------
codecamper
And America will go there with the help of a certain South African.

~~~
yammajr
The original op-ed actually addresses this. Sounds like the plan is to get
SpaceX, Blue Origin, et al. involved.

> To achieve these goals, the National Space Council will look beyond the
> halls of government for insight and expertise. In the coming weeks,
> President Trump and I will assemble a Users’ Advisory Group partly composed
> of leaders from America’s burgeoning commercial space industry. Business is
> leading the way on space technology, and we intend to draw from the
> bottomless well of innovation to solve the challenges ahead.

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-will-return-to-the-
moon...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-will-return-to-the-moonand-go-
beyond-1507158341)

------
yohann305
well, easy to state lapalissades now that we have Elon Musk working on it.

(lapalissade is an actual word. Came in handy today!
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapalissade](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapalissade))

------
donald123
we should just send Trump to the moon and be the president of the whole
planet.

~~~
codecamper
I was thinking he'd be perfect to be the first on Mars.

------
mud_dauber
No chance if driven by a government entity. None.

~~~
jbooth
Are you aware of how we got there the first time?

~~~
Consultant32452
They hired Stanley Kubrick to fake a moon landing but he was such a stickler
for detail that he demanded they do it on location.

