Human space program review recommends U.S. focus on Mars

[Buster's Uncle]

Human space program review recommends U.S. focus on Mars
Reuters
By Irene Klotz  June 4, 2014 2:18 PM



(Reuters) - The United States should abandon its "flexible approach" to human missions beyond Earth, set Mars as its ultimate goal and open the door to China among other potential partners, a review of the human space flight program said on Wednesday.

The National Research Council report, commissioned by the U.S. space agency NASA, recommends a stepping stone approach toward Mars that builds technological know-how through a series of well-defined preliminary missions.

All options begin with the International Space Station, a $100 billion research complex flying 250 miles (400 km) above Earth, the 286-page report released in Washington D.C., said.

One path includes NASA's current plan to robotically capture an asteroid, redirect it into a high orbit around the moon and send astronauts there to explore. The report suggests that path continue with missions to the moons of Mars, then on to Martian orbit and finally to the surface of the planet.

But two other paths would be less technologically daunting, NRC panel co-chairman Jonathan Lunine of Cornell University told reporters during a webcast press conference.

NASA could follow the International Space Station program, which currently costs the United States about $3 billion a year, with a series of lunar sorties, an outpost on the moon and then to Mars, the report said.

The last path has the most stops en route to Mars, but poses the least technological risk since milestones have to be met along the way. That option would follow the space station with human missions to an orbit beyond the moon, then to an asteroid in its native orbit, then to the lunar surface, the moons of Mars, Martian orbit and then to Mars itself.

NASA said it supports the panel’s findings.

"There is a consensus that our horizon goal should be a human mission to Mars," the agency said in a statement. "The pathways thrust of the report complements NASA's ongoing approach."

All options will depend heavily on international, private sector and other partnerships, according to the report titled “Pathways to Exploration - Rationales and Approaches for a U.S. Program of Human Space Exploration.”

“We’re really talking about international collaboration of a different scale than what has been conducted in the past,” Lunine said.

In particular, the United States’ current relationship with China, which is not a member of the 15-nation space station partnership, needs to be reassessed, the report said.

“Given the rapid development of China’s capabilities in space, it is in the best interests of the United States to be open to its inclusion in future international partnerships."

The panel gave no specific estimate of what a Mars mission would cost. But based on past space initiatives, the public would support the endeavor.

“There is a temptation to rush to the question of dollars,” panel co-chairman and former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels said. “Dollars is the secondary question.”

The pathways approach to Mars is “a very different way of doing business,” Lunine said.

(Reporting by Irene Klotz; Editing by Grant McCool)


http://news.yahoo.com/human-space-program-review-recommends-u-focus-mars-181827048.html

[Buster's Uncle]

Study: NASA can't afford a trip to Mars, but deserves the cash to do it
Engadget
BY Jon Fingas  @jonfingas  June 5th 2014, at 2:56:00 am ET






It's no secret that NASA's long-term goal is to get people to Mars. But how realistic is that objective, really? Unfortunately, the prospects aren't looking good right now. The National Research Council has conducted a review of NASA's space program that suggests its budget isn't practical for anything more than trips to lunar space, and might not even stretch that far. So long as the administration's finances aren't keeping up with inflation, any attempt to push past low Earth orbit would "invite failure" and "disillusionment," the Council says.

However, the NRC doesn't believe that NASA should scale back its ambitions. Instead, it suggests that the US government should loosen its purse strings to make sure those dreams come true; a budget growth rate of 5 percent per year could be enough to get humans on Mars with minimal risk. It won't be as simple as getting more cash, mind you. The Council also wants NASA to set clear milestones so that it has a sense of its progress, and it should warm up to international collaboration to both take advantage of pooled resources and improve the US' political standing. That last piece of advice may be tough to follow given the space agency's chilly attitudes toward China and Russia.

The study contends that it would easily be worth overcoming those challenges. Besides fulfilling short-political and scientific aims, maintaining plans to set foot on Mars could inspire students, unite humanity under a common cause and even save the species from extinction. It's tough to know if the White House will heed the advice in an era of budget cuts, but it's apparent that NASA at least has one major ally in its corner.


http://www.engadget.com/2014/06/05/nrc-study-of-nasa-programs/?ncid=rss_truncated

[Buster's Uncle]

Report: Without funding boost, Obama's plans to send man to Mars will be a 'failure'
The Week
 - - Jordan Valinsky  June 4



 Thinkstock 



The National Research Council is shooting President Obama's space-high plans back down to earth. In a 300-page report released today, the NRC said NASA's ambitious human spaceflight program has an "unsustainable and unsafe strategy" that will prevent the United States from landing a man on Mars in the near future.

NASA is spending several billion dollars in hopes of getting an astronaut on Mars in the 2030s. But to continue to move toward this goal using the allocated budgets — which doesn't keep pace with inflation — "is to invite failure, disillusionment, and the loss of the longstanding international perception that human spaceflight is something the United States does best," the report said.

The report concluded that it would be more feasible to send an astronaut back to the moon, a plan Obama vehemently opposes.
NASA spokesperson David Weaver didn't seem phased by the NRC's assessment. "NASA has made significant progress on many key elements that will be needed to reach Mars, and we continue on this path in collaboration with industry and other nations," he said.



http://theweek.com/article/index/262668/speedreads-report-without-funding-boost-obamas-plans-to-send-man-to-mars-will-be-a-failure#axzz33tGZkBnN