From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Lunar Resource Mapper Information
Date: 23 Jul 92 11:55:51 GMT
Reply-To: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

In article <22JUL199200003868@judy.uh.edu>, seds%cspar.dnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov writes...
> 
>Lunar Resource Mapper information that I give here is gleaned from presentations
>that I have heard in the last few months at various conferences.
>
[Lunar Resource Mapper information deleted]

Thank you for the information.  It is greatly appreciated.

>The cost for two spacecraft total mission expenditures is capped at somewhere
>under 200 million dollars exclusive of DSN support. This is a vast departure
>from the Lunar Observer mission, which uses much Mars Observer heritage hardware
>and from the last literature that I saw  the cost for LO was around 
>750 million dollars. I hope you correct
>me if I am wrong on this one Ron, I do not have the book in front of me. The
>high cost of LO was prime in the decision of Congress not to fund it as a new
>start up in FY 91 or 92.  

The Lunar Observer mission had a number of options, so the budget ranged
from 447 million to 1.1 billion dollars, but the baseline mission was at
600 million.

>Lunar Resource Mapper uses all of the research that was carried out by JPL on
>Lunar Observer and its predecessor Lunar Polar Orbiter as a baseline for the
>LRM missions.  

It is interesting to note that the 200 million for LRM does not include the 
ground work that was already done for Lunar Observer that LRM is using.

>Support LRM. Griffin's office took a 28% budget hit in the recission effort of
>the congress critters in June and not one person on here spoke up. Lunar 
>Resource Mapper needs to fly if for no other reason than it will shake JPL
>up and help them become saved to the gospel of faster cheaper better.

JPL had already adopted the concept of the faster and cheaper missions.  
Personally, I would like to go back to launching two spacecraft for every
mission (ie: Mariner, Voyager, Viking, etc.).  The proposed MESUR mission
will be sending *sixteen* landers to Mars.  Earlier this year JPL evaluated
120 proposals for future planetary missions ranging from Mercury to Pluto
including the asteroids and comets.  Each proposal followed the contraint
of a 100 million or 400 million budget for the mission.  The 10 best
proposals will undergo further studies, and then 2 or 3 of the survivors
will be proposed to NASA as a new mission start.

I'm all for the LRM mission, or any lunar mission for that matter, and I
don't care if JPL does the mission or not.  NASA hasn't had a lunar oriented
mission in 20 years.  My philosophy is to don't spend so much time
trying to design a mission (a la Space Station), just do it!
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Most of the things you 
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | worry about will never
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | happen.
Newsgroups: sci.optics