Encouraging to see him also mention Dr Spudis in the post you linked.

Looking back at my comments from 3 and half years ago I see that nothing has changed.

Though I became really interested in space exploration around 2006 in March of 2010 I was hooked (after Dr. Spudis’ work was key in finding ice on the Moon). I think that over 6 year journey will now reach some kind of turning point with the new NASA director.

It seems the future of space exploration for decades to come- during the last quarter century of my life- is about to be set in stone.

This is common with any dramatically themed presentation intended for entertainment. Any police officer looking for entertainment from a police procedural or nurse or doctor looking for it on that kind of show or any military or other participant in whatever arena is going to be unhappy with creative license.

Science fiction seems to get by on a peculiar form of suspension of disbelief where the person disregards the laws of physics or having no technical background at all does not question the gimmicks and bizarre premises. In my view it is not science fiction, it is “bad fantasy.”

I watch the expanse because the characters, actors, and acting is good and the visuals are interesting but…..as a whole it is not in any way what I would expect our future in space to look like. And that is what hard science fiction is all about- predicting the future.

The SLS can be what the shuttle should have been for the last 35 years- a Super Heavy Lift Vehicle sending worthwhile payloads to the Moon 8 to 10 times a year. The dead weight dragging the space agency down is the space station to nowhere and it’s associated worthless LEO taxis, the Absurd Retrieval Mission, and as always the always 10 years away J2M. The billions being pouring into these cul-de-sacs should be redirected into expanded SLS core production at Michoud and a lunar return.

If the next NASA director can divorce NewSpace and point the space agency back at the Moon by funding the SLS and discarding useless programs then we are on our way. Otherwise, the “flexible path” will continue to take us nowhere at all.

That is the guy Dr. Spudis reported on in an earlier post.

From that posting here is a link to his position on Space Policy.

http://bridenstine.house.gov/blog/?postid=758

We might be going back to the Moon unless Musk gets his claws in this guy.

– Rolling Stones on the Moon ‘SLS and Orion Concert 2037’

Happy New Year to Dr. Spudis, billgamesh, Joe, and all the other wonderful folks who appreciate our Moon!

Happy New Year to Dr. Spudis and all who are hoping for a lunar return in the coming years.

From: ‘Project New Orion: Pulsed Nuclear Space Propulsion Using Photofission Activated
by Ultra-Intense Laser’
By Robert LeMoyne and Timothy Mastroianni
At: http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JAMP_2016041311280742.pdf

“The Compton–Belkovich Thorium Anomaly was found in 1998 by the Gamma Ray Spectrometer (GRS) instrument on board the Lunar Prospector (LP) and subsequently identified as a hotspot, located around 61.1°N 99.5°E.[2] The estimated thorium concentration reaches 5.3 µg/g (5.3 micrograms per gram) while the surrounding highland basalts only contain between 0 and 2 µg/g. Compared to the Earth’s thorium concentration of 0.06 µg/g, the Compton–Belkovich’s is very high.[4]”

From: “Compton–Belkovich Thorium Anomaly’ Wikipedia

If a company or country lands a robotic rover, and eventually a team of geologists, on the Compton–Belkovich Thorium Anomaly, could that company or country then claim and mine all of the thorium there?

While Americans spend valuable time watching Mars nonsense on TV and listening to Mars ‘Soon and Cheaply Too’ silliness from NASA’s leadership and Elon Musk, are other folks getting ready to go to the Moon and tap its resources to develop their spacefaring capabilities?

“As envisioned by Russian engineers, the human-rated lander would consist of the 11-ton descent stage carrying landing gear and the propulsion system responsible for the trip from lunar orbit to the surface. In the meantime, the 8.5-ton ascent stage will contain the crew cabin with all the life-support gear and the engine to blast off from the lunar surface and to get back to the orbit around the Moon.”

From: ‘Revealed: Russia’s Crewed Lunar Lander
For the first time since the end of the Moon Race, Russian engineers have quietly begun working on a lunar lander capable of carrying cosmonauts to the Moon.’
By Anatoly Zak Feb 3, 2016
At: http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/moon-mars/news/a19269/revealed-russias-manned-lunar-lander/

Going to the Moon to tap its resources to build its industrial capabilities, Space Based Solar Power Satellites, O’Neill cylinders, and enormous telescopes and develop NEO detection and interception and deflection capabilities, Cislunar tourism, and the ability to launch ‘time-honored’ or maybe even “New Orion” nuclear pulsed spaceships from the Lunar surface offers a lot more high technology jobs in space and on the Home Planet than anything that could be offered anytime soon by ‘flags and footprints’ or highly risky and costly colonies on Mars.

Chemical propellant based and built on Earth spaceships would probably need to visit Lunar orbit to pick up massive amounts of Galactic Cosmic Radiation (GCR) shielding and propellant prior to heading off into Deep Space.

An Orion nuclear pulse type of spaceship could launch itself directly from the Moon with its GCR shielding and propellant already onboard.

If we humans are serious about exploring or mining or developing asteroids, NEOs, ‘Quasi-Moons’ like ‘2016 HO3’, and colonizing Mars, then large and powerful Orion nuclear pulse spaceships built on the Moon make a lot of sense.

Get ready to build Orion nuclear pulse spaceships on the Moon or instead watch foolish and nonscientific TV shows about Mars.

Is that such a hard choice?

The space shuttle ended up costing not much less than the Saturn V. That we could have been going to the Moon for the last 40 years makes me…..profoundly sad. For want of a few million dollars Mr. Brown sent Skylab up dry instead of with the second stage attached as a wet workshop.
A larger station than the decade-in-the-making over 100 billion dollar ISS would have gone up in one evening. And those stations could have kept going up- dozens of them. Not that LEO stations have proven to be worth a dime. They are a dead end unless filled with water from the Moon and made to do something besides go in circles.

The SRB’s of the shuttle were the major wrong turn. Not because they were solid fuel, but because they had to be of small enough diameter and segmented to be railed from and back to Utah. Thus, while monolithic solid fuel rocket boosters of 5 million pounds thrust had been fired and well over three times that figure were quite practical, the space shuttle was under-powered to the point that no mass for an escape system could be permitted to lower an already marginal payload.

What could have made it all work or at least allowed a cargo version to succeed was the pressure-fed booster that was not selected as a cost-cutting measure.

Pay now or pay later there is no cheap.

It is still the missing piece of hardware and both Musk and Bezos failed the genius test by not first developing a pressure-fed ocean recovered booster like the one originally specified for the shuttle.