The comments were from an interview with Bridenstine on July 2. These may or may not have been issues in the NASA mgt shakeup this week.
-
-
Show this thread
-
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine on the cost of getting to the moon in 2024: “I think it could be well less than $20 billion. I say that, because a lot of our commercial partners are willing to put their own money into it.”https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/12/science/nasa-moon-apollo-artemis.html …
Show this thread -
Context: a couple of weeks earlier, Bridenstine told CNN that NASA would need $20 billion to $30 billion added to its budget to pull off a 2024 moon landing.https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/13/tech/nasa-budget-moon-mission-artemis/index.html …
Show this thread -
By the way, wrapped about the scoops is a nice article about how everyone wants to go to the moon now after 30 years of no one caring at all.https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/12/science/nasa-moon-apollo-artemis.html …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Paywall.
-
Yes. That’s how I have a paying job.
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Which means NASA isn't adding much to the debt and cutting (even killing) NASA wouldn't noticeably move the needle on government spending.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Just an honest question, after all the Apollo missions why are we going back to the moon and not Setting our sights on something more ambitious like Mars? If we didn’t actually make it as conspiracy theorists claim, disregard the original question.
-
1) Lots to do at the moon still. Kinda like visiting Paris for 2 days and then asking, "Why do you want to go to France again?" 2) Moon is 230,000 miles away, Mars is a 150-million-mile trip. That's the difference between a baby taking a first step and running a mile.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.