# NASA Announces New Launch Vehicle and CEV

1. Sep 19, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

How We'll Get Back to the Moon -
http://www.nasa.gov/missions/solarsystem/cev.html

However -

NASA Estimates Moon Rocket Will Cost $104B http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050919/ap_on_sc/moon_rocket By MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer On the other hand, NASA has Michoud (La), Stennis (MS) and Marshall (AL) centers in the three states most affected by Katrina. 2. Sep 19, 2005 ### Rocketa That sounds Great! I love Rocket... 3. Sep 19, 2005 ### FredGarvin Unfortunately, it will never survive a change in the presidency. It is a nice thought that we will do it again, but I am not holding my breath on this one. 4. Sep 19, 2005 ### rocketboy let's see... graduate HS 2006 BS in Aero-engineering by 2011 MS in Aero-engineering by 2014 Industry related work experience...until 2016 Astronaut training program.... ...well, looks like it will be ready just in time! 5. Sep 19, 2005 ### rocketboy I just re-read the article...and I can't express how incredibly amazingly cool I think it would be to be one of the astronauts on that mission that lands on the moon! I don't think there is anything that I would rather do. I just had to let that out. On a more intellectual note... What do you think of the methane fuel idea? If methane can be extracted from mars then it would certainly provide a way of refueling the ship for the return trip, meaning that 100% of the fuel that is loaded on earth could be used for the one-way trip to mars. 6. Sep 20, 2005 ### Astronuc ### Staff: Mentor Possibly several presidents! The current one, 2008, 2012. Just look at Prometheus! Been there, done that, more than once. :grumpy: @#$^&%

7. Sep 20, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

8. Sep 20, 2005

### Francis M

I can't get the link to come up. What's the gist of it and what's bothering you about it Astronuc?

What bothers me is that this seems to fall under "the more things change the more they seem to stay the same" category. We seem to have waited 30 years to go full circle back to capsules from space planes :rofl: and a good 15 years before the 70's they had this great idea of reusable space planes to build a space station in orbit for research/manufacturing/building ships dedicated to going to the moon and back. Ahhh bureaucracy and politics at its finest

9. Sep 20, 2005

### SkepticJ

Well they didn't know about the fact that a tiny piece of foam hitting a wing could allow a multi billion dollar shuttle to be destroyed, along with the crew, now did they?

Note it was an idea for a shuttle. Dyson Spheres were thought up back in the 50s, wha...what's taking so long? Ideas take time to make them real.
What I wish is that lots of money would be dumped into a ribbon-type space elevator or a space fountain That's the real way to get to space cheaply and safely.

10. Sep 22, 2005

### Staff: Mentor

If you have problems with the pdf file, then you might need to update Adobe Acrobat reader, or simply use "Save target as".

The document is high level, executive summary type statements, so its not very substantive. They are introducing a 'new' system. Perhaps some of the components, e.g. SRB's and rocket motors, have been demonstrated, but the integrated system is new and needs to be demonstrated.

As for new digital technology - hold on there! The microprocessors used in the shuttle and ISS are basically equivalent to P3's (Pentium 3's)! Yes that's right - P3's. Why you ask. Because the radiation in space zaps P4's and better. The higher the transistor density, the more likely ROM and RAM gets zapped by stray particles. BTW - astronauts get zapped as well.

A friend at NASA informed me that rebooting computers in space is not uncommon.

11. Sep 23, 2005

### enigma

Staff Emeritus
I split out the space elevator discussion to here