Article View: sci.space
Article #6354Re: funding for Lunar Prospector urgently needed
From: Graham O'Neil
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 18:02
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 18:02
90 lines
4917 bytes
4917 bytes
In <22DEC199214281236@judy.uh.edu> Dennis Wingo writes: >Lunar Resource Mapper is not dead as of this time. Work is still >progressing at the two contractors selected for the Phase A study. >(Martin & Boeing) This at present is unfunded by NASA but indications >are that money will be available for the studies in the spring. So >don't count LRM dead yet. Note what Dennis is saying is that if work is being performed on LRM, it is company profits that are being used. Over the last 20 years, there have been many years where, US funding would be available in the spring for lunar science missions. However I would not count LRM as dead, even if funding does not materialize in the spring of 93. >Also there are other Lunar missions that are NASA supported and under >consideration. One is the Lunar Geophysical Explorer sponsored by >JPL. There i s also another private effort waiting in the wings if >these NASA supported mission do not come off. No I won't give any >information on the private effort yet. It will not go forward unless >the NASA efforts clearly are not going to be funded. This effort is >not in any way connected to Lunar Prospector however and is guaranteed >to cost less and already has significant aerospace support. There are and have been many NASA supported [and even funded] studies and Phase A projects for Lunar missions. JPL's LGE is at present NASA supported but not NASA funded. I guess the real question is where this unnamed private effort will go forward from. How much system engineering has been done, mission planning, infrastructure for scientific data acquisition, analysis and archival, design maturity...? Even if this project doesn't come to fruition, I would like to see the details on how it will cost less than Lunar Prospector. There are sure to be many lessons learned from that information. If it costs less, how much science will be on it? And what does significant aerospace support really mean? For instance, the University of Colorado mission [Hanson and Humble] has imaging as a priority, but few science instruments as a payload. I suspect they have even less money than LRM, LGE, or LEI, but they certainly have significant aerospace support. And that might be a different community than space science support, or SEI precursor mission support. And then in <22DEC199220260175@judy.uh.edu>, where Dennis seemingly misunderstands Henry's point >>In article <BzoqqC.24@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes... >>The $30M in question was first-year funding to get Griffin's entire effort >>started; this was to include the beginnings of the mapper project, which >>would end up costing $30M or so for the spacecraft proper. >> >>Griffin didn't get it. >The money is coming from JSC internal funds as well as left over >funds from other operations at Griffin's code. I repeat the project >is not dead as of this time. Stop work orders on this have been issued from both Building 1 [carryover, discretionary] and the Nova building [other money pots related to SEI, or code SL]. While I wouldn't call it dead, employees on both government and contractor sides are being Approved For Reassignment [AFRed] or worse. Indeed any NASA centers discretionary funding can only go so far. >This money also does not affect the Lunar Geophysical Explorer which >is not part of SEI. It seems that you can get money as long as the >SEI tag is not attached. Heck there is 5 million dollars this year for >the Lunar power beaming project and money is being spent even now for >the Lunar far side telescope project. It may seem you can get money if SEI is not tagged along, but lets look for money for real hardware, money for launch, and money for mission operations... Help me, I can't find the line item for those elements of a Lunar mission in the NASA budget, or the Center budgets. Maybe Marshall has some discretionary money for this that you've seen? Meanwhile LEI is working to get Prospector off the ground, with or without US government funds and in a timely fashion. Checkout the archives at ames in /pub/LEI. graham -- Graham O'Neil oneil@aio.jsc.nasa.gov GONEIL@nasamail Lockheed 2400 NASA RD 1 Houston, TX 77058 (713)333-7197 ---------------------------------------------------------- Practice Random Kindness and Senseless Acts of Beauty
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Dec24.180240.26026@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!ames!data.nas.nasa.gov!eos!aio!oneilShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.space Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!ames!data.nas.nasa.gov!eos!aio!oneil From: oneil@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (Graham O'Neil) Subject: Re: funding for Lunar Prospector urgently needed Message-ID: <1992Dec24.180240.26026@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Followup-To: sci.space Summary: Balancing other funding sources and other programs Keywords: Lunar, SEI, Prospector, Funding, Payload Organization: nasa-jsc Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 18:02:40 GMT Lines: 90