NASA Outlines "Flagship" Technology Demonstrations

FleaPlus writes "As part of its new plans, NASA has outlined the initial series of large-scale 'flagship' technology demonstration (FTD) missions for developing and testing technologies needed for sustainable beyond-Earth exploration, complementing the smaller-scale ETDD missions outlined previously. The first four FTD missions (costing $400M-$1B each, about the cost of the recent Ares I-X suborbital rocket launch) are scheduled to launch between 2014 and 2016, demonstrating advanced in-space propulsion (next-generation ion propulsion and solar arrays), in-space propellant transfer and storage, a lightweight/inflatable mission module at the ISS (which will also test closed-loop life support), and an inflatable aeroshell for aerocapture at Mars. A multi-purpose robotic rendezvous and docking vehicle will also be developed to support these missions."

Re:Still flying Russian for the next two decades.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see what the problem is here.

So they shuttle us up and then we blast off to Mars while they're still stuck in LEO or at best Lunar landings.

"Thanks for the boost, losers. Now we're going to the big boy playground."

"If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."

Or to put it in a more spacey context.

"If I have been able to go further than others, it is because I kicked off other people's shoulders because those idiots kept trying to make themselves taller while I focused on learning to fly."

Hell, if they're willing to spend their money on getting into orbit, why should we make one too? We're at peace. We're friendly. We'll use their crap while we focus on other stuff.

Making the same thing in 5 different countries just slows down progress. It may result in cool innovations, but I'd rather have one group working on part A and the other working on part B instead of both needing to finish A before working on B.

Re:Finally some real technology development

[Larson2042]

Proven approaches to what? Orbital fuel depots and refueling, inflatable aero shells, tens of kW electric propulsion for manned missions, and inflatable habitats don't have proven approaches yet. That's the whole point of these kinds of programs. The only way NASA will be able to stay with "proven approaches" is to remain in LEO and build carbon-copy ISSs. Even then, I remain far from convinced that what NASA does today should be considered a "proven approach" to manned spaceflight. While they've done some amazing things, human spaceflight still remains rare and hideously expensive. I would prefer that not be the approach to such matters going into the future.

X Projects

[Anonymous Coward]

Only 14 posts? What's the matter with you guys? NASA is doing X Projects again and this is a Good Thing.

One of the projects is for on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellants. I wonder if "cryogenic" has the traditional NASA meaning of "liquid hydrogen" or if it refers to easier-to-handle substances like LOX or liquid methane.

Oh, and where's the love for VASIMR and aerospike engines?