Gingrich Space Plan

[ladajo]

So Newt recently said:

Gingrich laid out this goal during a speech in the city of Cocoa, on Florida's Space Coast. He also said that near-Earth space would be bustling with commercial activity by 2020, and that America would possess a next-generation propulsion system by then, allowing the nation to get astronauts to Mars quickly and efficiently

http://www.space.com/14363-newt-gingric ... -mars.html

And was quoted elsewhere that the system would allow rapid continuous <thrust> to get quickly to Mars, etc.

Just what system is he talking about? I poked around lightly, but did not see what he tied his speaking points to.

Maybe he knows something we don't? (Mild sarcasm intended).

[Skipjack]

Well the first thing we would need is a new propulsion system with which we would be able to get into orbit. In order to get "space bustling with activity", you need to get there first. SpaceX is on the right track, but even they wont lower the cost of space access sufficiently.
Maybe if John Slough got funding for his fusion engine and rocket engine spin off, we might get there, but I am somewhat doubtful that this could be done by 2020.

[ladajo]

He also vowed that by the end of 2020 the US would have “the first continuous propulsion system in space” to allow for far shorter trips to Mars.

http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/01/26 ... ce-speech/

This is the one where he states "continuous propulsion". What in the world is he talking about?

[Skipjack]

What in the world is he talking about?

Sad to say that, but I think he does not know that himself, unless there is some super secret government programme, that we dont know about (and he for some reason does).

[Carl White]

He also vowed that by the end of 2020 the US would have “the first continuous propulsion system in space” to allow for far shorter trips to Mars.

http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/01/26 ... ce-speech/

This is the one where he states "continuous propulsion". What in the world is he talking about?

The Russians are developing a 1 MW nuclear reactor for space. Put that together with VASIMR and you could have continuous propulsion. That's one guess.

[GIThruster]

There are lots of people at NASA who are convinced VASIMR is going to be used, probably with Nautilus-X; to go to Mars, near Earth asteroids, etc. The plan is still contingent upon a huge power source like what was planned for Prometheus and that was closed down in 2005, but the work was all moved to the Navy and they still have all the specs for an SP-100 follow on. Also, according to wiki the SAFE 400 work is still going on at Marshall. It wouldn't take much to turn that into a real development program.

As an interplanetary spacecraft like this is contingent upon a space nuclear reactor, so too is a Moonbase. I don't think Gingrich has any idea what these things would cost. He's just making empty campaign promises. Still, it's refreshing to find anyone in politics who knows how to stroke the space advocacy folk. It would be nice to have a next gen SP-100 so we could at least consider connecting it to VASIMR.

[GIThruster]

Here's another link with some other quotes:

http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/tre80p ... ich-space/

Gingrich said he wanted to spend 10 percent of NASA's $18 billion budget on prize money for competitions that spur innovation and technological breakthroughs in space.

"I'm prepared to invest the prestige of the presidency in communicating and building a nationwide movement in favor of space," Gingrich said at a meeting of aerospace executives and community leaders after the rally.

"If we do it right, it'll be wild and it will be just the most fun you've ever seen," he said.

During a debate in Florida on Monday, Romney said he believed space should be a priority.

"What we have right now is a president who does not have a vision or a mission for NASA. I happen to believe our space program is important not only for science, but also for commercial development and for military development," he said.

[GIThruster]

I have to wonder if Gingrich is familiar with the political troubles NASA faces when it tries to move on and do new things. I'd love to hear what he thinks of the Senate Launch System debacle. POTUS could easily end that nonsense but that would cost some political capital. I don't think Gingrich is thinking about that when he makes these grandiose promises.

[KitemanSA]

Remarkably, this is NOT a new condition with him. I attended a Space Development Conference MANY years ago where he was either the keynote (or maybe the banquet) speaker. He was quite pro-space even back then. It was the first I ever heard of him. A young Georgia Rep.

[Skipjack]

Put that together with VASIMR and you could have continuous propulsion.

Well until the fuel runs out...

What we have right now is a president who does not have a vision or a mission for NASA.

Which is of course BS. The original plan by the administration for NASA was very good. Unfortunately the administration has completely failed to communicate it to the public and congress, which then butchered it into what we have now.

[GIThruster]

Em, what was OBama's original plan again? You mean when he was campaigning and said he wanted to take $5B from NASA and give it to education? Or when he ended Constellation without a replacement? Or when he bent over and let the Senate take control of NASA?

[Skipjack]

Em, what was OBama's original plan again? You mean when he was campaigning and said he wanted to take $5B from NASA and give it to education? Or when he ended Constellation without a replacement? Or when he bent over and let the Senate take control of NASA?

Do a god darn google search!
The original plan was to let NASA do actual science and research new enabling technologies for future space missions and leave space access to the commercials.
That was a good plan.
Constellation was years behind schedule and over budget and still only existed on paper. Obama also did not cut the NASA budget. This is a typical lie spread by certain people. He proposed INCREASING the NASA budget even.
But even with the increased budget Constellation would have not been doable and it was not going to be ready until 2017 at the earliest. By that time the ISS would have to be dumped into the ocean due to lack of funding (because it would have been all in Constellation).
Constellation was not a good idea to begin with and just designed to keep the pork flowing to certain districts. Of course these successfully lobbied to do the same with the SLS.
What is a valid critizism of the administration, is that they completely failed to explain and promote their plan to the public and congress, so they would get support for it there. Instead Obama once again just caved in and let congress do whatever they wanted. He has been an amazingly weak president so far.

[CaptainBeowulf]

If what he's saying is based on anything, I suspect he would be thinking of VASIMR for in-space propulsion, whether or not that includes a nuclear power source. VASIMR is well along in development and certainly would open up earth orbit to the rest of the solar system, but the problem would remain surface to LEO.

Of course, if Congress continues with its preferred shuttle derived HLV, America will have an expensive rocket looking for a mission. Sure, there's the terrestrial planet finder telescope and the occasional reboost module or other such thing for the space station, but what else? So, his plan isn't necessarily revolutionary - let Congress dish out pork for SDHLV launches, and use VASIMR to go to Mars. It's just that it could be portrayed as revolutionary to get votes, with most of the talk about redirecting NASA funding for prizes being just talk.

On the other hand, he may think that SpaceX can do Falcon Heavy/Falcon X if there's billions in prize money around, and that would solve the surface to orbit part of the equation.

I don't expect Mars or moon missions to materialize soon. Even if a true Falcon HLV is developed and VASIMR is ready, building the equipment for Mars and moon bases and doing all the astronaut training and mission control stuff is still very expensive... and, well, America (and most of the rest of the world) is in a huge financial hole right now.

[GIThruster]

What is a valid critizism of the administration, is that they completely failed to explain and promote their plan to the public and congress, so they would get support for it there.

You're kidding yourself. OBama didn't have a plan for NASA. When you blithely champion him as though he did, you like he, leave out all the details. When you don't have details for a plan, you don't have a plan!

I agree Constellation was a mess and ought to have been cancelled, and likewise that SLS is another mess we don't need. We could easily get by with ATLAS and Delta and Falcon and Zenit and whatever else private industry comes up with. After asking for $2B to man rate the ATLAS during the Augustine hearings, ULA decided to do it anyway, and with almost no money. Goes to show these things can be done.

Where is OBama during all this? Taking a nap. He hasn't contributed a single notion to the space program. He's utterly failed in every way to provide vision. He's not even in control of NASA anymore! The Senate is!

How can you possibly say a single positive thing about a man who abdicates his position of leadership when tens of billions of dollars, tens of thousands of jobs and the future of America's leadership is in the balance? When it comes to space and NASA, OBama is a failure in every way possible.

I'm not excited about Newt running for office, nor the idea of a lunar outpost, but I'd much rather suffer those kinds of troubles than the horrid failure to lead (except from behind) that OBama provides.

[Skipjack]

You're kidding yourself. OBama didn't have a plan for NASA. When you blithely champion him as though he did, you like he, leave out all the details.

Yes, he did have a plan and it did have details. Please stop your childish bitching.

Where is OBama during all this? Taking a nap. He hasn't contributed a single notion to the space program. He's utterly failed in every way to provide vision. He's not even in control of NASA anymore! The Senate is!

That my dear sir is my issue with him. I did like the original plan that was based on the recommendations by an independent panel of experts (Augustine commission) and it was actually quite libertarian in many of its ideas (let the free market compete for fixed price contracts instead of cost plus BS and all that). It was neat and clean.
You seem to be one of those that so desparately need some big stunt mission to the moon or to mars to have "a vision". The vision of the administration was a space infrastructure which should be the basis for any future exploration programme. If you go to the moon without a proper infrastructure in place, you will achieve nothing. You will have another expensive stunt that will waste billions and not result in anything permanent. There is a reason we have not been back to the moon yet. The reason is that the Apollo programme did not build a sustainable infrastructure. Instead it was a very expensive stunt, designed to beat the Russians to the moon, for prestige and pretty much nothing else.
Well, there are no Russians to compete with right now and if the Chinese want to do a one or two mission moon stunt, so be it. It will just be a costy publicity stunt and in terms of publicity it wont even be as great anymore, because, you know, they were only the second to make it there.