[ad_1]
The idea was simple when Vice President Mike Pence introduced it earlier this year: invite astronauts to return to the moon by 2024, not 2028 as planned by NASA.
To this end, the White House has proposed a temporary increase of $ 1.6 billion this year in NASA's budget, as well as an additional $ 20 billion to $ 30 billion over the next five years. coming years.
But accelerated efforts are now stalled as Republican lawmakers argue over who will receive the spoils from this lucrative program. The former president of the house, Newt Gingrich, has meanwhile urged US President Donald Trump to avoid all this and to organize a competition for space companies.
The meeting scheduled for Tuesday (August 20) of the National Council of Space, led by Mr. Pence, which will include discussions on "innovative space initiatives and the exploration of the human space" , seems to ignore these major financial hurdles, which prevent the initiative from getting off the ground.
The bipartisan agreement to increase domestic spending reached this month has allowed the Moon to give a little hope. But the $ 27 billion in additional public spending is not enough to allow a trip to the moon in 2024 alongside scientific missions that the agency had already planned. The House of Representatives passed a NASA funding bill in May that excluded the $ 1.6 billion requested by the White House, now NASA on track. All hope of starting the accelerated moon project now rests on the Senate to the Republicans.
That's why NASA was in a disastrous state last week: Ars Technica announced that the space agency would build its lunar landing gear at Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama instead of the Johnson Space Center in Texas. NASA Director Jim Bridenstine asked for a correction, saying that the story was inaccurate. But it's true, it's true: Marshall is building the lander. An angry Texan Congress delegation is now officially asking for the return of work in the state of Lone Star. It will be difficult to put Republican senators on the same page when it comes to funding this program if they argue over which state will receive the jobs and the money.
The Trump administration did not explain how extending the landing period would provide additional scientific or commercial advantage; Much of the rhetoric behind the acceleration hints at the need to follow China's lunar ambitions and avoid further delays. But as Trump has accumulated a record national debt, lawmakers have been reluctant to approve new spending.
Some space exploration advocates are calling for a radically different approach: Gingrich and his company are offering a $ 2 billion private company contest to send astronauts back to the moon. While competitions previously spurred on space innovation, experts are skeptical that $ 2 billion will help solve the costly problem of transporting people safely through space.
A recent contest to place a robot on the moon, the Google Lunar XPrize, was canceled after a $ 20 million grand prize failed to put one of the participating teams on the road to success.
The current challenge for NASA is how to integrate funding and public goals with private capabilities. NASA hired Mark Sirangelo, a space veteran, to take up the challenge. But he left after 45 days. Bill Gerstenmaier, the former head of the agency's manned robbery, who led the agency's partnerships with private companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin, was ousted last month.
The next lunar program manager at NASA will have some work to do.
[ad_2]
Source link