Two other things I like about this report (and hopefully Griffin, if it reflects his thinking):
1. Shuttle-derived heavy lift. The report leans strongly to something like "shuttle-C" or something like that as the best path to a true heavy lift (100 tons or so) capability in the near future. I'll defer to actual rocket scientists here but that sounds reasonable, even if it's not the fully-reusable system that would get you cheap access at the same time. Also good to see them make it clear that you MUST have heavy-lift to go anywhere, and not fantasize that you'll do Mars exploration without building any big new rockets.
2. Moon in perspective. This report does _not_ give top billing to Moon missions. Doesn't rule them out, and acknowledges (correctly) that there is still interesting science to do on the Moon. But it doesn't see the Moon as driver of the effort in its own right, nor as a vital and valuable proving ground. Some value, sure, essential, not necessarily. If anything, it ranks NEOs above the Moon as targets.
If Griffin really feels that way himself that's at odds with his new marching orders, but perhaps on the margins he'll make decisions that leave the road open beyond the Moon.
Space/Science » in reply to Mike Griffin's road map to Mars
Other good points
The whole thread (44 posts)
- Mike Griffin's road map to Mars
- I think rocket technology is about as good as it's going to get
- Other good points
- I agree
- The 30+ years hasn't been a complete waist.
- re: I agree
- Could the shuttles be redesigned?
- I agree