NASA estimates it will take between $ 20 and $ 30 billion for moon landing, says one administrator

by



[ad_1]

The space agency will need about $ 20 billion to $ 30 billion over the next five years for its moon project, CNN Business said Thursday to NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine. This would amount to adding an additional $ 4 to $ 6 billion a year to the agency's budget, which is already expected to reach about $ 20 billion a year.

Bridenstine's remarks are the first time that NASA shares an estimate of the total cost of its program on the Moon called Artemis (according to the Greek goddess of the moon) and could send people to the lunar surface for the first time times for half a century. NASA wants this mission to include two astronauts: a man and the first woman to walk on the moon.

The overall goal of the Artemis program is to establish a "sustainable" presence on the Moon, paving the way for astronauts to return to the surface again and again. Learning to live and work on another world, said Bridenstine, will prepare them for NASA's long-term mission: to place people on Mars for the first time in the history of mankind.
The cost estimate of $ 20 to $ 30 billion is less expensive than some had predicted – although they are not necessarily the final numbers. Bridenstine acknowledged that spaceflight can be dangerous and unpredictable. It is therefore almost impossible to choose a fair price.

"We are negotiating within the administration," he said. "We are talking to [the federal Office of Management and Budget]; we are talking to the National Council of Space. "(The National Space Council is a newly revived policy development group led by Vice President Mike Pence.)

"Once we have made a decision in the administration," said Bridenstine, "we will of course pass this on the Hill and ensure that our congressmen are interested and willing to support this effort. ".

Will NASA have its money?

Winning against the legislators, however, will probably be the hardest part.

In March, Pence announced that the Trump administration wanted to accelerate NASA's ambitions for the moon and launch the first crewed mission in 2024 instead of 2028, the previous precedent. It's only in five years. And all the equipment that NASA needs is either late, well over budget, or does not exist yet.

Until now, NASA has officially requested only an additional $ 1.6 billion to Artemis, which Bridenstine has described as a "small down payment" for the entire program.

Meanwhile, members of Congress have asked the administration after an estimate of the total cost and a detailed plan on how it will spend the money. Bridenstine will also have to convince the already skeptical Democrats.

Critics also point out that NASA has poured billions of dollars into deep space programs over the past 15 years, although humans have not returned to the lunar surface since the last Apollo mission in 1972.
The Apollo program also took place in a very different political environment. It was during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, and the United States was eager to defeat their enemies on the surface of the moon. In total, the United States spent about $ 25 billion on the Apollo program, nearly $ 150 billion in current dollars.

Some fear that NASA will divert funds from its other programs, including robotic exploration missions, earth sciences and climate, as well as other important scientific research.

"I'm going to tell you that my goal – and I've been very clear about this – is to make sure we do not cannibalize parts of NASA to fund the Artemis program," Bridenstine said.

And, he said, he is confident that NASA will convince Congress to commit to it: "I think there is a strong desire.It is bipartite to explore , to learn, to understand the science and history of our own solar system. "

Break down the budget

NASA and US taxpayers have already invested heavily in the rocket and spacecraft that will be used for the trip. But these projects have been systematically criticized. They are years behind and far exceed their budget.

Space Launch System, or SLS, is the name of a new gargantuan rocket that promises to surpass any launcher ever built and to be able to project people to the Moon or Mars.
According to a recent report by the Office of the Inspector General, NASA had already spent at least $ 12 billion, which is expected to cost about $ 9.7 billion and start flying in 2017. NASA should already fly to earlier.
Jeff Bezos wants Blue Origin to go to the moon. Here is why it's a big problem
Similarly, Orion, the name of the spacecraft that will be launched on SLS and will transport astronauts to the moon, exceeds the budget by several hundreds of millions of dollars, according to the Government Accountability Office.

NASA also needs additional equipment: a small space station called the lunar bridge, which will serve as a relay for astronauts, and a lander capable of directing people from the station to the surface of the moon. .

These are not cheap projects.

Nevertheless, NASA's spending has been a drop in the basket compared to many other departments. The defense department's annual budget, for example, has reached $ 1.3 trillion a year. Health and social services receive about $ 90 billion a year. And Homeland Security receives about $ 50 billion every year.

What does it mean for companies

NASA is not the only organization talking about returning to the moon. The United States has a thriving commercial space industry and SpaceX, the industry's rainmaker, has its own project to build a giant rocket and fly tourists around the moon.

And NASA is careful: an important part of the research and development for the Artemis program will come from the private sector. This is part of NASA and Bridenstine's plan to reduce costs and make space a business-friendly environment.

"We are returning to the moon, but we are doing it in a totally different way than the 1960s," Bridenstine told CNN Business. "The reason we need commercial operators is that they can stimulate innovation when they are competitive in terms of costs and innovation."

NASA has a long history of working with entrepreneurs. Boeing, for example, participated in the construction of the Saturn V rocket at the origin of the Apollo program. And lately, Lockheed Martin and Boeing are the main contractors of Orion and SLS.

NASA chooses three companies to send cargo to the moon

But NASA's business partnerships are different: the space agency wants private-sector companies to design, test, and build technologies, then compete for lucrative government contracts. According to Bridenstine, NASA will essentially become another customer for companies in the space travel industry.

The space agency has already said it wants to appeal to the private sector to take over the lunar landing gear. Three tens of millions of NASA dollars have been allocated to three small companies that build robotic undercarriages to allow them to drop goods on the moon. And startups like Blue Origin, from Jeff Bezos, who is currently building a worthy landing gear, Blue Moon, will compete for contracts for the construction of lunar landing gear worthy of the crew.

[ad_2]

Source link