NASA Chief Says US Will Return To Moon Within Trump's Second Term (cnbc.com)
- Reference: 0180462017
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/12/26/2339234/nasa-chief-says-us-will-return-to-moon-within-trumps-second-term
- Source link: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/26/nasa-boss-isaacman-us-will-return-to-the-moon-within-trumps-term.html
The potential opportunities include establishing space data centers and infrastructure on the moon, as well as mining Helium-3, a rare gas embedded in the lunar surface that could serve as fuel for fusion power. NASA is currently working on its Artemis campaign alongside SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Boeing. Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act allocated $9.9 billion to the agency earlier this year.
The Artemis II mission, NASA's first crewed test flight using the Space Launch System rocket and Orion spacecraft, is expected to launch in the near future. SpaceX is contracted to build the lunar landing system for the subsequent Artemis III mission. Isaacman was first nominated by Trump in December 2024 but had his nomination pulled in May over unspecified "prior associations." Trump renominated him in November.
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/26/nasa-boss-isaacman-us-will-return-to-the-moon-within-trumps-term.html
Re: (Score:1)
LOL, dream on comrade.
Re: (Score:1)
Unless China has a time machine also, no, they're can't "beat them" (the US).
Re: China will beat them (Score:2)
some Chinese people believe the US moon landing was fake, some Americans also think that too.
Re: (Score:2)
Turns out no culture has a monopoly on fucking morons.
He probably knows something we don't (Score:3)
which is that Trump doesn't intend to let go of power in 3 years.
Re: (Score:3)
> which is that Trump doesn't intend to let go of power in 3 years.
In three years, Trump will likely be either dead or drooling away what's left of his sorry-ass life. Captain Eyeliner, aka Couchfucker, is the one we have to worry about.
Re: (Score:2)
You say that but we watched Mitch McConnell have a brain reboot on live tv and he's still upright and mobile (kind of).
Re: (Score:2)
>> which is that Trump doesn't intend to let go of power in 3 years.
> In three years, Trump will likely be either dead or drooling away what's left of his sorry-ass life.
You do understand that DT is not the only person named Trump who could run for president in 2028, right?
Re: (Score:2)
> Captain Eyeliner, aka Couchfucker, is the one we have to worry about.
Vance went from "Trump could be America's Hitler" to serving as his VP.
If I were you I'd worry more about who's going to be pulling that spineless nonentity's strings because, unlike Trump, Vance seems to have no convictions whatsoever.
Re: (Score:2)
> Vance will be sidelined as soon as he becomes too uppity for his master the Donald.
Not if The Donald dies, retires with a blanket pardon, or is ousted 25A style before the end of his term.
Re: (Score:2)
> Vance went from "Trump could be America's Hitler" to serving as his VP.
Which is probably why he wanted to be VP. /cynical
Data centers on the moon (Score:2, Informative)
> The potential opportunities include establishing space data centers and infrastructure on the moon,...
Unless you've got quantum networks up and running that's not going to fly for realtime applications: there's an (average) 1.253 second communication delay between the earth and moon... each way!
Re:Data centers on the moon (Score:4, Insightful)
>> The potential opportunities include establishing space data centers and infrastructure on the moon,...
> Unless you've got quantum networks up and running that's not going to fly for realtime applications: there's an (average) 1.253 second communication delay between the earth and moon... each way!
Yes, but that's really not the big problem at all. It would obviously exclude some applications requiring low latency, but it's a insignificant issue as a whole.
With the naive approach, a data-center is simply lot of computers. Rows after rows racks filled with computers. And when you look closer, those computers require power and power distribution. And those also fills up racks, and in a large data-centers it's thousands of those power racks. A power converter/distribution rack with decent power density easily clocks in at 2000kg or more. And when it's estimated that to launch 1kg to Low Earth Orbit (LEO), you need a minimum of about 30 Megajoules. And something like additional 800MJ to get it to the Moon, it kind of adds up. The estimates are somewhere above 1million $ per kilogram delivered to the Moon. So 2000million$ for one power distribution rack, and you probably need at least a thousand for a small/medium size data-center. It quite fast becomes obvious that data-centers on the moon is nonsense. And the same conclusion are also apparent for data centers in space/orbit. Not something to take seriously, either just nonsense or some kind of scam.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but those are problems that could actually be solved. Difficult, but possible. I'd question the benefit, and see it as only reasonable as a research project. And I think the farside radio telescope more worthwhile. (Also easier.)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, carp. Commenting to undo bad mod.
Re: (Score:2)
Are your calculations for AC? As I've just heard of popular developments of DC local zones gaining momentum to simplify all the power management and save on energy losses due to conversion - for sure it would simplify the power units and on the Moon no point of using AC in data centers.
Howerer the Earth's orbit is a better place IMO - having constant Sun exposure for power and easier maintenance, so I wonder why the Moon then.
Re: (Score:2)
Both constant sun exposure for power, and a constant ambient temperature of the CMBR on the other side for dissipation. It's better in just about every way, except potentially the shielding that can be provided below the lunar surface.
Re: (Score:2)
Space is not a good environment for the operation of computer components, due to the harsh temperature fluctuations and constant bombardment by cosmic rays. Especially microscopic components that don't tolerate misalignments due to thermal expansion, and cold welding phenomena.
Actual result will be different (Score:4, Insightful)
Approx $100 B will be transferred to SpaceX and/or anyone else who can find a way to funnel money from the project to Cheeto Grande. About 2 years in, they will announce short delays. The next president, assuming it's not couchfucker, will find out that less than 1% of the necessary work has been completed correctly when taking office.
Re: (Score:2)
SpaceX isn't getting a man to the moon this decade, much less the next few years.
The refueling logistics for such a Starship mission are frankly fucking staggering.
That said, they'll almost certainly be involved- but not at that price. I think they're getting like $4B for their role in Artemis.
The good news is that Mexico will pay for it (Score:2)
When are we going to finish building the wall to keep Americans from leaving the country, anyway? I thought that was one of Trump's priorities.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry. It's done and Mexico did pay for it just like he said. He keeps his promises. At least that's what they tell me. Must be true.
Re: The good news is that Mexico will pay for it (Score:2)
just like drug prices, immigration is down 1500%
if drug price discounts over 100 means the companies are paying you to take the drugs, then immigration over 100 means people are leaving USA. Sounds about right.
Not buying it (Score:1)
As much as I would love to see us back on the moon, considering I was ten years old when we were there last, I don't see it happening. NASA is bloated, not the steelie eyed rocket men of the 60's.
NASA may have made a mistake (Score:4, Informative)
:et me preface this with I hop they succeed, we need to bring back these types of acheivements.
However, I think that NASA may have made a mistake relying on commercial suppliers for the moon lander.
Not designing a lander and taking it with them on SLS like they did in the Apollo missions may be the thing which prevents success. Of course, that would have been more for the taxpayers to shoulder.
To get to the moon before 2028 seems like a long shot, and even 2030 seems doubtful.
I think the current regime has moved the goal posts. If the reason is to get there before China, then they should be taking the lander with them on SLS. If the reason is persistent presence on the moon, then commercial solutions are required.
China IS taking a lander with them.
The whole idea of orbital refueling is completely untested.
Re: (Score:1)
None of that plan had anything to do with "commercial provider".
That's the original, utterly-shit NASA plan.
Parts of NASA are still clearly capable of greatness.
Parts decayed to sludge under perennial short -funding, of course, but also the great distractions of diversity mandates and "Arab outreach" missions.
I want more than anything to see this mission succeed. We need to get to the moon and plant a base in at least one pole before the Chinese - this will have impact on future space development for centu
Re: (Score:2)
End of Tump's term gives them three years. China has said "around 2030", which seems more realistic, and they are on track for it.
It seems unlikely that SpaceX will get Starship working and man rated by then, let alone able to land on the moon and return to orbit. Ditto for Blue Origin's large rocket and crew capsule, but they are probably the closer of the two.
The worst part is that they could be putting lives at risk just to rush here.
Like the world has never seen (Score:2)
If I were an astronaut, I'd be a bit hesitant about being in the crew of a moon mission that was some sort of Trump initiative. It feels vunderable to a new dimension of risk.
Re: Like the world has never seen (Score:2)
Yeah, think of the ratings! Especially if there's a few explosions. Oh yeah, that is marketing gold right there.
Waste of money (Score:1)
Trump Admin burning more public funds.
Serves as a reminder to (Score:2)
Reread Andy Weir's Artemis.
Pretty Please (Score:2)
Can they take Trump with them and leave him on the Moon?
2nd term ? (Score:2)
Section 1
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or
Good luck (Score:2)
Good luck with that with the cuts they've made to NASA and the general contempt for science in this administration. It would likely just be a way to funnel huge amounts of taxpayer money to a few favored companies. Like, ummmm, SpaceX.
False promises (Score:3)
The only reason we will establish a moon base is so we can eventually turn the moon into a giant advertising billboard.
Re: (Score:2)
Just install uBlock into your interactive contact lenses.
Re:False promises (Score:4, Interesting)
> The only reason we will establish a moon base is so we can eventually turn the moon into a giant advertising billboard.
It's already been done in Science Fiction - refer to Heinlein's "The Man who Sold the Moon". That seems appropriate given the degree of Science Fictional 'thinking' going on in the squirelly brains of people like Trump and Thiel.
Re: False promises (Score:2)
Oh, psst...you know any rich Arabs? They love the big dream. Looks the pyramids? That is one huge muthatucker. Took 80 years to build. Bury me in it. How about modern day? The hotels and such at Mecca are on a grand scale. What about The Line city? Kushner can probably sell this.
Re: (Score:2)
The Pyramids were not constructed by Arabs.
I get that they're both brown, so it can be confusing.
Re: False promises (Score:2)
I was told the pyramids were built by little grey men.
Re:False promises (Score:5, Insightful)
> The only reason we will establish a moon base is so we can eventually turn the moon into a giant advertising billboard.
And so Trump can put his name on it -- The Donald J. Trump Moon Base.
(For sure the base will be painted gold, btw.)
(sigh)
Re: (Score:2)
I wish you were joking.
Re: (Score:2)
> I wish you were joking.
Wait until he wants one of his new "Trump-class" "battleships" on the Moon.
Re: False promises (Score:2)
I've heard they're to have giant "lasers"
Re: (Score:2)
And militarize it.