Comments on: Fighting for the Moon in Alabama http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/16/fighting-for-the-moon-in-alabama/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fighting-for-the-moon-in-alabama Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: kert http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/16/fighting-for-the-moon-in-alabama/#comment-11995 Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:09:01 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/16/fighting-for-the-moon-in-alabama/#comment-11995 RLEP landers could provide vital data for many potential business ventures that just cant close right now because of large unknowns. Water Ice ? Sunlight illumination conditions ? LunOX demo ?

I’d say it would be smart of the NewSpace people to get behind the robotic part of VSE, as its about the only useful thing that looks to be coming out of this. Certainly better value for the dollars spent than any of the Stick&Constellation thingies.

The question is, will you once drink mineral water bottled on lunar poles or not ? Think of the novelty value ..

]]> By: Edward Wright http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/16/fighting-for-the-moon-in-alabama/#comment-11990 Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:32:48 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/16/fighting-for-the-moon-in-alabama/#comment-11990 Here’s the curious part.

The article says, “Canceling the lander mission would save NASA $105.8 million this year, according to the operating plan.”

However, the Congressional letter is merely “directing the agency to spend $20 million this year to continue work on a follow-on to the 2008 Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.”

Restoring 19% of the money might allow the office to remain open, but it’s hard to see how the mission could proceed unless it was redesigned along faster, better, cheaper lines.

]]>