Author
|
Topic: [Discuss] NASA's Asteroid Redirect Mission
|
fredtrav Member Posts: 1799 From: Birmingham AL Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted 05-25-2016 02:25 PM
quote: Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: If that does not happen and Congress passes a continuing resolution instead, then the status quo is maintained.
If a continuing resolution is what happens, I think it be prudent of NASA to work on technology that could be used on either mission first, as the mission could be changed to the moon rather than an asteroid. If NASA works on technology that could be used on either than they have not wasted a lot of money. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 50516 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-25-2016 02:37 PM
By definition, a CR continues the previous year's work at the same budget levels. NASA would not able to redirect funds from ARM development for technologies that might be applicable to a lunar program; that would require either a change in policy set by the President or a change in appropriations set by Congress. |
Fra Mauro Member Posts: 1739 From: Bethpage, N.Y. Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 08-22-2016 02:09 PM
With a year delay in the mission (and the added costs to that), it seems like this project is in jeopardy. |
328KF Member Posts: 1388 From: Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 11-29-2016 07:47 PM
House Space Committee lawmakers today sent Administrator Bolden a strongly worded letter on a recent claims that ARM was becoming "accepted" by science advisory groups. Contrary to the assertions made in the press release, numerous advisory bodies have questioned the merits of the President's ARM mission. The NASA Advisory Council, the Small Bodies Assessment Group (SBAG), and the National Research Council have all raised concerns with the mission since its proposal by the Administration. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 50516 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 11-29-2016 07:57 PM
This is the NASA press release that Reps. Smith and Babin are questioning. And this is the report, cited by the release, that identified... ...any connections between the science objectives for small bodies as identified in the planetary decadal survey report "Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022" and those stated as ARM objectives. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 50516 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 03-16-2017 09:04 AM
The White House has proposed cancelling the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) in Fiscal Year 2018 to "accommodate increasing development costs" of the Orion crew vehicle, Space Launch System and associated ground systems. Per NASA's Acting Administrator Robert Lightfoot: We remain committed to the next human missions to deep space, but we will not pursue the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) with this budget. This doesn't mean, however, that the hard work of the teams already working on ARM will be lost. We will continue the solar electric propulsion efforts benefiting from those developments for future in space transportation initiatives. I have had personal involvement with this team and their progress for the past few years, and am I extremely proud of their efforts to advance this mission. In the recently passed NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017, Congress called for NASA to evaluate... ...alternative approaches to the Asteroid Robotic Redirect Mission for demonstrating the technologies and capabilities needed for a human mission to Mars that would otherwise be demonstrated by the Asteroid Robotic Redirect Mission. |
oly Member Posts: 1450 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2015
|
posted 03-17-2017 02:52 AM
Is there any information regarding how much of the work done on the redirect mission can be crossed over to other programs and how much will be shelved or lost? |
Glint Member Posts: 1116 From: New Windsor, Maryland USA Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 03-17-2017 11:43 AM
Aviation Week's Aerospacae Daily & Defense Report for today indicated that, while the proposed budget blueprint would "scrap the previous administration's plan to capture an asteroid," it also includes a boost for future human presence in deep space: The Trump administration's budget blueprint would still prioritize deep-space human spaceflight, providing $3.7 billion for the Orion crew vehicle, the Space Launch System and associated ground systems. To offset the development costs of those programs, the administration recommends scrapping President Barack Obama's Asteroid Redirect Mission. More reductions in that area are possible. "NASA will investigate approaches for reducing the costs of exploration missions to enable a more expansive exploration program." This and other budget highlights was already mentioned in bullet form within the forum topic linked by Robert above. Sounds like a good change in priorities overall, in my opinion. |
328KF Member Posts: 1388 From: Registered: Apr 2008
|
posted 06-14-2017 09:03 PM
End of story. With administration plans to cancel it announced earlier this year, and a lack of congressional support, NASA is in an "orderly closeout" phase of its Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) while keeping alive some of its key technologies for other applications.In a presentation at a June 13 meeting of the Small Bodies Assessment Group (SBAG) here, Michele Gates, program director for ARM at NASA Headquarters, said the mission received its "notice of defunding" from agency leadership in April, weeks after a budget blueprint document for fiscal year 2018 released by the White House called for cancelling the mission. "We are in an orderly closeout phase, capturing all the good work that has been done across the team, and transitioning activities as appropriate to other potential missions or archived for future use," she said. |
Go4Launch Member Posts: 562 From: Seminole, Fla. Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 06-15-2017 08:51 AM
Good. This was truly a preposterous idea. |
Blackarrow Member Posts: 3604 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 06-15-2017 05:12 PM
Agreed. If you want to explore an asteroid, go to the asteroid. Ideally Phobos. |
Fra Mauro Member Posts: 1739 From: Bethpage, N.Y. Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 06-16-2017 05:55 AM
I was never a fan of this mission. The downside is that money was wasted again (this seems to happen in many Administrations) that could have been put into either the Orion/SLS program or the Commercial Space initiative. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 50516 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-16-2017 07:52 AM
It is too soon to say that the money was wasted. The propulsion module developed for ARM is now being considered for the Deep Space Gateway, the solar electric propulsion research has applications for crewed and robotic exploration missions and the bolder retrieval system could by applied to other sample return missions, including to Phobos and Deimos. |