The administrator said that a nuclear power and propulsion rocket will launch before the end of Trump’s term.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...qqv2%2Bl0UZM0bK4c%3D

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman announced his agency’s commitment to developing a nuclear propulsion system for missions to Mars within the next three years.

“Before the end of @POTUS‘ term, @NASA will lay the foundation of a ’transcontinental railroad' to Mars,” Isaacman wrote on X on Jan. 30. “By utilizing nuclear electric propulsion, our nation will have the tools necessary to establish a Martian outpost and maintain American superiority in deep space.”
The administrator shared a clip from a Jan. 30 appearance on Fox News in which he explained that while NASA continues its work to put boots back on the moon, it will also launch its first nuclear power and propulsion rocket by the end of President Donald Trump’s term.

“That’s going to essentially almost establish the transcontinental railroad to Mars,” he said. “It’s how you efficiently move lots of mass to Mars. So it’s not necessarily always the fastest way to get there, but it gives you the tools to build out potentially a Martian outpost, certainly to mine and refine propellant on Mars, which is what you’re going to need to bring your astronauts back home.”

He explained that America would have the capability to send astronauts to Mars, but the hard part was bringing them back. Nuclear power and propulsion solved that problem.

Meanwhile, Isaacman reaffirmed that the Artemis program would continue to push forward the goal of the president’s national space policy to not just land humans back on the moon, but to construct a lunar base in order to stay and fulfill its scientific, economic, and strategic potential.

That base, he said, will involve a nuclear power plant, as well as mining operations, and refining Helium 3, which is considered to be the best fuel for nuclear fusion reactors, and plan to do it before communist China’s plan to do so by 2030.

“The Chinese said they’re going to do it,” Isaacman said of a nuclear reactor on the moon, “We’re going to do it first.”

But all of these plans still start with the mission whose rocket stands at Launch Complex 39-B at Kennedy Space Center in Florida: Artemis II. That 10-day mission, which will carry humans around the moon for the first time since Apollo 17 in 1972, and could do so as early as Feb. 8, awaits the results of a crucial dress rehearsal of launch day conditions set for Feb. 2.

“America’s mission to the Moon won’t end with a handful of landings,” Isaacman said on X. ”We will undertake repeatable and affordable missions that expand our presence across the lunar surface, fulfilling a 35-year promise to the American taxpayer.”

A big challenge is getting sufficient mass into LEO so as to convey it to Mars and kick start factories on the planet itself or in orbit. Use of the moon as a terminal seems to me non-optimal, yet another gravity well to overcome. Building infrastructure at a LaGrange point may be more sustainable.

There is also the huge impediment of the Martian atmosphere to overcome. Without some sort of major addition of water via an impact with a large icy bolide, the conversion of Mars's atmosphere into one in which plants and animals can persist will take Centuries if not Millennia.

Finally, the question of whether Mars receives "enough" sunlight to provide energy for an ecosystem is a huge unknown. We may have to build continent-sized mirrors to redirect enough light to the planet.

Any estimates on how many hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars this will add to the National debt?

While sci-fi considers the idea of Martian settlements and outposts the biggest deficiency that Mars has is that it has no magnetic field surrounding the planet so the cosmic radiation will always be lethal and any attempt to create an atmosphere will be futile as the solar wind will strip it away as soon as it’s created.

The only way to inhabit Mars will be either underground or under giant domes.

Have we re-figured out how to get a spacecraft into the moon's orbit yet?

Mars seems like a big stretch.

quote:

Originally posted by Graniteguy:
Have we re-figured out how to get a spacecraft into the moon's orbit yet?

We figured that out in the Sixties.

My father worked on nuclear power for satellites in the 1960s. Wonder if anyone knows where all that research is today. Probably in a grey steel filing cabinet in Oak Ridge in a warehouse.

quote:

Originally posted by Orguss:

quote:

Originally posted by Graniteguy:
Have we re-figured out how to get a spacecraft into the moon's orbit yet?

We figured that out in the Sixties.

Yes, that's why I said "re" figured out. Our space program(s) are in shambles. I used to be in the camp of "this is wasted money". However, after seeing the billions and billions of tax dollars going to fraud, I would rather we spent it on space exploration.

Artimis II launches 4 astronauts to the moon in a week or so. They'll orbit but not land on the moon.

It appears that we have re-figured out how to get people to the moon.

I was not aware they were officially entering the moons orbit. The NASA articles I have read said otherwise.

quote:

“It’s how you efficiently move lots of mass to Mars. So it’s not necessarily always the fastest way to get there, but it gives you the tools to build out potentially a Martian outpost, certainly to mine and refine propellant on Mars, which is what you’re going to need to bring your astronauts back home.”

Yeah, no... Not for me. I'm too old for that.
But I know there are plenty of young, adventurous explorers who would be willing to go. Good for them. I wish them success.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
Artimis II launches 4 astronauts to the moon in a week or so. They'll orbit but not land on the moon.

It appears that we have re-figured out how to get people to the moon.

More or less a repeat of Apollo 8.

I have a lot of concerns about this flight. The stack hasn’t flown. Hasn’t been tested in earth orbit. The command module is an upsized Apollo CM from seating 3 to 4.

The stack looks very ‘shuttle-esque’ and that was how many years ago.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
I have a lot of concerns about this flight. The stack hasn’t flown. Hasn’t been tested in earth orbit. The command module is an upsized Apollo CM from seating 3 to 4.

The stack looks very ‘shuttle-esque’ and that was how many years ago.

I thought Artemis II is basically the same as Artemis I, but now with real people on board?

Just in time to land at Musk Spaceport.

quote:

Originally posted by RichardC:
[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Wuao1LgO66w" width="560"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

NASA says the studied and fixed the problem with the heatshield over a year ago: NASA Identifies Cause of Artemis I Orion Heat Shield Char Loss