We got an audience with the “Lunar Viceroy” to talk how NASA will build a Moon base

"It has been clear that we all need to be focused on one thing, not 10 things."

See full article...

 

[George Moromisato]

The way Garcia-Galan's passion comes through is so refreshing and exciting. He's right: everyone at NASA could make more money building missiles and bombers, but they stay because of the dream of exploration.

Perhaps the reason SpaceX has been so successful is not because they "move fast and break things" but because they have the passion and the mission that aligns everyone at the company towards a goal.

Now it seems that NASA has it too. If so, this could be the start of a whole new age of space exploration!

 

[flamingjello]

I, for one, am done with bullshit made-up titles being tossed around, particularly since they have now had their little pee-pees slapped in court for trying to use the avoidance of established roles as a defense from Musk's actions as Whatever-the-hell-he-was-doing-in-chief.

/rantoff

Deputy Administrator for Lunar Development or something, sure. VIceroy? Nope all day.

It's not his official title, it was said somewhat in jest, somewhat in affection for the person taking the role (as stated in the article).

 

[adingo]

Have they laid out a detailed rationale for why they’re building a moon base? All we seem to hear about are the needs for rocketry, landers, rovers, etc., how many trips it will take to ferry and land the estimated mass of everything, and so on. As if the moon base was an end in itself, rather than a means to accomplish some interesting science. Does a document exist that lays out a plan of activities, experiments, and exploration for when this becomes operational?

 

[graylshaped]

It's not his official title, it was said somewhat in jest, somewhat in affection for the person taking the role (as stated in the article).

In other times, under other administrations, maybe if we didn't have a self-titled Secretary of War thinking that it is his job to wage war instead of defend the country and its principles, I would agree with you.

But these aren't those times.

 

[rachel612]

Have they laid out a detailed rationale for why they’re building a moon base? All we seem to hear about are the needs for rocketry, landers, rovers, etc., how many trips it will take to ferry and land the estimated mass of everything, and so on. As if the moon base was an end in itself, rather than a means to accomplish some interesting science. Does a document exist that lays out a plan of activities, experiments, and exploration for when this becomes operational?

It’s an announcement to give the appearance of progress. The number of things that need to be developed and implemented to achieve this is so vast, there’s no way to spell that out clearly at the moment.

So we get an announcement. In much the same way Elon is occasionally fond of making announcements. Doesn’t mean it will be funded or actually implemented- especially with the way the US economy is headed.

(I’m sure Garcia-Galan is a good and talented guy. But this has all the makings of a “five year plan”).

 

[Dark Jaguar]

Lunar Viceroy is, admittedly, exactly the sort of title some futurist from 1902 would have predicted our "Master of Mistress Luna" would have by now. It doesn't make it sound any less ridiculous.

 

[Dan Homerick]

I like that he's got some energy and enthusiasm, because if you can't muster those at the beginning of a project, god help you once you hit the slog.

 

[rcduke]

I appreciate the enthusiasm, but I feel like other research projects are more valuable to Science than a Lunar base. This really screams of "The President wants X so we'll say we'll work towards X" instead of "Oh, X will be a step towards bettering humanity so let's do it."

And that's before you even deal with budget constraints, which last I heard, the White House was still trying to cut NASA's budget for the next year. (I know Congress mostly reverted the WH's wants but the WH is very determined.)

 

[Septentrion]

Since "viceroy" derives from "in place of the king" or "representing the king," the title--even in jest--is dangerous in these times. The USA has a wannabee king, and about a third of the electorate seems on board with his path to coronation.

A portion of NASA's communication seems tuned for an audience of one. This word, in this context, may dog whistle to that one vain and villainous man's self-importance. No, just no.

 

[Rambie]

Have they laid out a detailed rationale for why they’re building a moon base?

Keep the Chinese from taking that spot?

 

[mopeus]

Have they laid out a detailed rationale for why they’re building a moon base? All we seem to hear about are the needs for rocketry, landers, rovers, etc., how many trips it will take to ferry and land the estimated mass of everything, and so on. As if the moon base was an end in itself, rather than a means to accomplish some interesting science. Does a document exist that lays out a plan of activities, experiments, and exploration for when this becomes operational?

Everything this administration does can be understood as the urges of a 12 years old (boy). Then, it all makes sense.

 

[NominalEngineer]

I really can't stand how this forum always devolves into political talk, jeez...

 

[Dan Homerick]

Have they laid out a detailed rationale for why they’re building a moon base? All we seem to hear about are the needs for rocketry, landers, rovers, etc., how many trips it will take to ferry and land the estimated mass of everything, and so on. As if the moon base was an end in itself, rather than a means to accomplish some interesting science. Does a document exist that lays out a plan of activities, experiments, and exploration for when this becomes operational?

It's a massive prestige project.

I think that's mostly fine, since NASA is mostly a prestige org. Yes, it's also a science org, but that's because the US views doing world-class science with headline grabbing rovers and probes to be a prestige activity worth funding.

Many in this administration are actively hostile towards science, but still want prestige, and so we're going to have lots of talk about a moon base (yay building stuff), and precious little talk about science goals.

That's troubling, but I expect that plenty of genuine science will still happen, it'll just be coded as "exploration".

 

[GoogleBoy]

Let's not forget the risk of future human space flight gaps (there were two of them - shuttle-related).

With ISS scheduled for retirement circa 2030, a new, still-experimental SLS with a single unmanned flight test, if a gap occurs again (prayers and luck that it does not happen) the whole architecture is at the mercy of a single-point-failure event with a gap that would spread over several years and impact decisions on what to do with ISS.

Shouldn't the next SLS flight be unmanned to play it safe, given what was found in the first flight test, with safety of flight clearances passed with evidence from computer simulations and analysis projections?

That's a big risk given what is at stake here IMHO.

Humble engineer.

 

[Dan Homerick]

I really can't stand how this forum always devolves into political talk, jeez...

Page one, always. It's mostly hot takes. Later pages usually have more tech-centric discussions.

 

[Harry the HNunter]

As a casual observer of Ars's coverage of The United States lunar program(s) I come away with the impression that its little more than a multi-billion dollar clown car that is not actually going anywhere..

 

[beestrofowler]

Have they laid out a detailed rationale for why they’re building a moon base? All we seem to hear about are the needs for rocketry, landers, rovers, etc., how many trips it will take to ferry and land the estimated mass of everything, and so on. As if the moon base was an end in itself, rather than a means to accomplish some interesting science. Does a document exist that lays out a plan of activities, experiments, and exploration for when this becomes operational?

The moon is a harsh mistress

 

[Anton Longshot]

“It has been clear that we all need to be focused on one thing, not 10 things.”

Yeah. And for those of us paying the bills, none of those things is in space. Focusing on space is something you do once you've taken care of the things you need to do down on Earth... there's a long, long to-do list.

If people had decided on going that route in the sixties my life and my outlook on humanity would be poorer than it is now. Because thát's how I feel about the Giant Leap I got to watch live.
I'm well aware that for many that event has little or no meaning.
But I'm not those people and I gave up on trying to be like other people when I was a kid.

 

[archtop]

Lunar Viceroy is, admittedly, exactly the sort of title some futurist from 1902 would have predicted our "Master of Mistress Luna" would have by now. It doesn't make it sound any less ridiculous.

Um. it was humour.

 

[frazing]

Have they laid out a detailed rationale for why they’re building a moon base? All we seem to hear about are the needs for rocketry, landers, rovers, etc., how many trips it will take to ferry and land the estimated mass of everything, and so on. As if the moon base was an end in itself, rather than a means to accomplish some interesting science. Does a document exist that lays out a plan of activities, experiments, and exploration for when this becomes operational?

conquest first ... science later. But you probably knew that.

 

[graylshaped]

Um. it was humour.

A tasteless, tone-deaf joke is as far as I can go with this crowd.

 

[Steven Duchateau]

And some of that money will get drawn from other things that we’re going to refocus.

The more I read about this new flag-planting endeavour, the more I fear that it will be funded by taking away money from missions with an actual scientific purpose.

That does not make me happy.

 

[HungaryMan7]

Let's not forget the risk of future human space flight gaps (there were two of them - shuttle-related).

With ISS scheduled for retirement circa 2030, a new, still-experimental SLS with a single unmanned flight test, if a gap occurs again (prayers and luck that it does not happen) the whole architecture is at the mercy of a single-point-failure event with a gap that would spread over several years and impact decisions on what to do with ISS.

Shouldn't the next SLS flight be unmanned to play it safe, given what was found in the first flight test, with safety of flight clearances passed with evidence from computer simulations and analysis projections?

That's a big risk given what is at stake here IMHO.

Humble engineer.

Agree 100% that the upcoming SLS/Orion test flight should be unmanned.

Regarding human spaceflight gaps, SLS currently flies and I understand it wouldn’t be that difficult to use some some of the commercial rockets to launch Orion in the future.

 

[Barleyman]

Agree 100% that the upcoming SLS/Orion test flight should be unmanned.

Regarding human spaceflight gaps, SLS currently flies and I understand it wouldn’t be that difficult to use some some of the commercial rockets to launch Orion in the future.

Orion is a hog, you need something like Starship or perhaps NG with upgraded 2nd stage to throw it anywhere useful. It's also a staggeringly expensive piece of kit, but I guess trying to kick over all the pork barrels in one go isn't a great idea and there's no direct replacement for it right now or even being worked on seriously AFAIK. Dragon XL would be the closest thing but it's for hauling cargo, not people.

 

[InvariantCapitalist]

I, for one, am done with bullshit made-up titles being tossed around, particularly since they have now had their little pee-pees slapped in court for trying to use the avoidance of established roles as a defense from Musk's actions as Whatever-the-hell-he-was-doing-in-chief.

/rantoff

Deputy Administrator for Lunar Development or something, sure. VIceroy? Nope all day.

Deputy Satrap for Lunar Surface inspection and Acquisition?

 

[InvariantCapitalist]

“It has been clear that we all need to be focused on one thing, not 10 things.”

Yeah. And for those of us paying the bills, none of those things is in space. Focusing on space is something you do once you've taken care of the things you need to do down on Earth... there's a long, long to-do list.

What won’t we be doing on earth because of this project?

 

[InvariantCapitalist]

Let's not forget the risk of future human space flight gaps (there were two of them - shuttle-related).

With ISS scheduled for retirement circa 2030, a new, still-experimental SLS with a single unmanned flight test, if a gap occurs again (prayers and luck that it does not happen) the whole architecture is at the mercy of a single-point-failure event with a gap that would spread over several years and impact decisions on what to do with ISS.

Shouldn't the next SLS flight be unmanned to play it safe, given what was found in the first flight test, with safety of flight clearances passed with evidence from computer simulations and analysis projections?

That's a big risk given what is at stake here IMHO.

Humble engineer.

I really hope they consider crews riding crew dragons to space and back, and docking with HLS to go direct to and from lunar surface.

It would still be a single point of failure, but saves a more dangerous docking in lunar orbit, and would massively increase cadence, and how often and many crews we can send for a far more dynamic lunar exploration program and base. And far far cheaper than using Orion/SLS.

The single point of failure can then be resolved by man-rating New Glenn, getting Starliner into service, and getting BO landers operating. Then we have multiple options, all able to fly many times a year, transporting crews every few months if not more often, and emergency landers if HLS develops a problem.

 

[InvariantCapitalist]

Sorry, why are the loaded questions in this softball interview falsely suggesting that there is now a clear vision?

The only vision I see is a bunch of taxpayer dollars going to commercial companies to build things and transport them to the lunar surface.

That's basically the same exact thing that was happening before, just different companies this time.

You apparently missed its repurposing tens of billions that was previously going to be spent building Gateway, which wasn’t anywhere near the lunar surface except for a few hours every couple weeks, for far more useful scientific and exploration activities on the surface.

 

[InvariantCapitalist]

The more I read about this new flag-planting endeavour, the more I fear that it will be funded by taking away money from missions with an actual scientific purpose.

That does not make me happy.

Again they just announced repurposing pork into useful projects and claim no increase in planned spending. Can’t we at least wait until they demonstrate they need more money before we decide the glass is half empty?

 

[InvariantCapitalist]

The moon is a harsh mistress

Get yourself to mars the surface of the moon!

 

[2021spaceodyssey]

Have they laid out a detailed rationale for why they’re building a moon base? All we seem to hear about are the needs for rocketry, landers, rovers, etc., how many trips it will take to ferry and land the estimated mass of everything, and so on. As if the moon base was an end in itself, rather than a means to accomplish some interesting science. Does a document exist that lays out a plan of activities, experiments, and exploration for when this becomes operational?

One does wonder what they’ll be doing up there other than staying alive and maintaining the base… what do they do in Antarctica? Isaacman positioned it as a proving ground for tech that will enable further solar system exploration, which makes some sense.

 

[InvariantCapitalist]

It’s an announcement to give the appearance of progress. The number of things that need to be developed and implemented to achieve this is so vast, there’s no way to spell that out clearly at the moment.

So we get an announcement. In much the same way Elon is occasionally fond of making announcements. Doesn’t mean it will be funded or actually implemented- especially with the way the US economy is headed.

(I’m sure Garcia-Galan is a good and talented guy. But this has all the makings of a “five year plan”).

No it’s an announcement of real progress. Killing gateway is a huge step, and the reason that we don’t have a detailed plan yet is because of how disjoint Artemis was before this change.

Previously the highest priority was figuring out how Gateway would work, the detailed specs for the different contractors and how it would all fit together, and what activities they could do with this weird space station in its strange NHRO trajectory that kept it far away from the moon for almost its entire orbit.

Surface activities/habitats/equipment were on the back burner because they would happen later in the plan , probably much later. So they haven’t been thoroughly mapped out at all. Expecting them in this announcement is like expect the original Apollo program to have similar detail on its landing priorities/activities/suits/landers/etc.

 

[InvariantCapitalist]

One does wonder what they’ll be doing up there other than staying alive and maintaining the base… what do they do in Antarctica? Isaacman positioned it as a proving ground for tech that will enable further solar system exploration, which makes some sense.

1) Exploring hundreds of kilometers of unexplored lunar terrain.
2) taking samples that can provide more detail on it and the earth’s formation,
3) looking for resources, like potentially exotic metals or elements. including finding caves/crevices that might give access to buried meteoroid metals.
4) drilling into moon to verify how deep dust goes and how deep mascons are and their composition.
5) test how the human body responds to low gravity. We have zero health data on low gravity, just lots on zero gravity or earth gravity. Important for missions to mars and other moons.
6) test how easy it is for plants and animals to be grown in low gravity.
7) run test projects to harvest water from polar craters.
8) run test projects to make hydrolox from the water.
9) see how easy it is to create fuels from more exotic lunar materials such as aluminum.
Etc/etc.

Is that enough?

 

[Neal McQuaid]

I’d like to think one great learning outcome of this project if it gets built is how we can sustainably live and manufacture on another piece of rock off-earth. Those science and engineering learnings alone would be a great start - it becomes a learning phase for if we decide to go further….

Lots of words so far, however, the ‘Jared factor’ may become a term to celebrate in 5 years.