It is now 2026 and we will wait until 2011 to pave the way for lunar exploration. What a slow way to go.

So I guess my question for Nasa is in that same period of time how many more probes will be designed and readied for launch one right after the other.

Or will we just wait until 2023 for the first manned landing. A total of 16 years is a long time to wait. Apollo was done in less than a decade. Why can we not do it in less than taht time frame is the real question.

I am sure like so many others that I am not alone in thinking about Nasa missions. Have wondered why there is always a short duration objective with little else thought of for the probe or satelite to do once its main goal has been achieve. The examples of the Mars rovers come to mind for there ability to endure the harsh environment to which they are currently operationg in. They have completed there primary goal and are currently working on the extended version of the same goal. Since the winter month are so harsh they most likely will not survive but there is a chance that they will. What would of happened if the rovers had been given a way to survive? Would there main objective still be to look for water signs. Giving the robotic rover the ability to dig a cave to get out of the harsh winter atmosphere would have been one of my thoughts. Planning in other tools to be used would have been another. But all this usually leads to a larger unit.

In the case of the Lunar Reconnaissance orbiter its main goals will be met within a short period of time. Though it will be loaded with lots of instruments, it will mainly set idle with nothing to do once man can go to the moon.

Since communication are of great importance and that there is no network of satelites surrounding the moon. Why not give it that one last long term goal. Making each probe with a common long term hardware and with short term objectives spread out accross multiple units instead of just one.

Sammy,

We don't live in the same time as the Apollo years, there is no urgency to spend over $100 billion (adjust for inflation), political or otherwise to go to the moon. Although I imagine a potential Comet or Asteroid impact would move things along.
IMHO 2011 is actually being rather quick. think that we will have a new spacecraft flying within 10 years. Thats pretty good.

Am I wrong in thinking that at least some of the objectives of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter could be delivered by planned private missions. Also, things like high resolution mapping of the surface and radiation profiles, even prospecting for certain minerals is well within the reach of existing hardware. What is NASA hoping to accomplish with this mission that warrants such a long delay?

Bush invites Apollo team to White House
By Frank Sietzen
United Press International
Published 7/12/2026 9:47 AM

WASHINGTON, July 12 (UPI) -- President George W. Bush has asked the Apollo 11 astronauts and their families to join him in a private meeting in the White House Oval Office next week, administration officials told United Press International.

Officials described the meeting -- on July 21, which is 35 years and one day after the first moon landing -- as a private affair and not an event. The three former astronauts -- Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins -- will attend along with their families. Other retired astronauts from the Apollo era also may attend the closed meeting.

Sources close to some of the astronauts hinted that a public statement urging support for the president's new moon-Mars space plan might follow the meeting, but there has been no official confirmation of that prospect. On the evening of July 20, the actual 35th anniversary of the landing, NASA and aerospace industry will host a reception for the astronauts and their families at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington.

No public statement is expected at this event, which will also be closed to news media, UPI was told.

On July 20, 1969, astronauts Armstrong and Aldrin piloted the Apollo 11 lunar module Eagle onto the moon's surface.
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040711-114153-7983r

Long before we can all dream of going to the moon as indicated by the presidents vision. We must get the shuttle flying again in order to complete the ISS and as well for our own national pride I feel. Much effort has been put into the return to flight of the shuttle by Nasa for crew safety. Status can be found here.
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/status/stsstat/2004/months.htm
Along with recommendations from the board much has been done on the shuttle from a repair in orbit prospective, sensing of debri hits on the leading edge and removing the chance for foam strikes from the external tank. Much of this is still being worked on and still contain issues to be resolved.
Improvements to current shuttle and to future ship design for inspection from strikes.
System To Monitor Heat Panels Could Safeguard Future Spacecraft
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/rocketscience-04s.html

Around the World, Nations Shoot for the Moon
an article on space.com http://space.com/news/moon_international_040716.html
Talks about all the Nations that have in planning stage mission going to the moon. Many before our own date of 2011. Do we really want to appear as a second rate space nation or the real deal as a leader as we once were.

Here I go again. why is it that the only solution to satelite decommissioning is to allow it to burn up in the atmosphere. The article on spacedaily Japan agrees to end TRMM mission, Scientists have argued against the plan, noting that the spacecraft is healthy and has enough propellant onboard to continue operations for up to two more years and still permit a controlled reentry.

I guess the question I have would be can it be put with a controled burn on a path to orbit the moon. I am sure even though the crafts available instruments are ideal for lunar exploration that they still could be of some value.

This probably qualifies more for the robotic booster attachment than does hubble.

Also if it is possible gets the mapping ability to the moon long before the 2011 date of the LRO.
Granted it won't be as capable as the one probe does all but it is a start.

The budget cuts by the house.
Among the cuts:
$230 million for Project Prometheus, NASA's nuclear-propulsion development program

Will cause research developement delays

$70 million for development of robotic missions to the moon

Will lower Lunar Recon Orbitor expectations of high tech instrumentation and could introduce delay in the 2011 launching.

$120 million from the international space station

Less air or less water, some repair supplies and even possibly closing for a time with manned presence aboard the ISS.

$438 million from the development of the Crew Exploration Vehicle, NASA's next-generation spacecraft for manned space flight

Will not only delay the CEV but puts more of a burden on the use of the shuttle for manned flights.

After the LRO has done it's study of the moon and Nasa has all the data that it would need. Could the unit be salvaged and used for Mars exploration doing the same as it had for the Moon with regards to mapping and such. Add a new booster stage and what ever else would be required and launch it on its way to save money and to speed up the process of getting us to Mars.