The task of "Nasa" to the moon vary in its place despite its tremendous costs

There are government projects characterized by financial waste, but nothing is comparable to the “Artemis” program implemented by NASA. After more than half a century on the giant leap reached by astronaut Neil Armstrong for humanity, the purpose of “Artemis” was to return to the moon again. So far, about $ 100 billion has been spent without anyone being able to leave the country, and the level of complexity in the program and the fatal waste of money continues to increase. The next US president must therefore reconsider the entire program. As a person who is a great respect for science, and he strongly supports the exploration of space, the more I know more about “Artemis”, it became clear to me that he was a tremendous waste of taxpayer money. Scientific or political mission? The problem lies mainly in the same task, as it is political as scientific. There is a bit of what people can do on the moon and robots cannot do. Technology has developed a lot since 1969, and we do not need another person on the moon to collect rocks or make scientific measurements. The costs associated with people to the moon, including their potential rescue plans in the case of complications, are very large. To understand the enormous level of spending, one billion dollars can be ignored on space uniforms that have not yet been delivered. This is a small amount compared to the rocket, called the ‘Space Launch System’. Where the reports of the NASA inspector general estimated that the program has so far drained $ 23.8 billion. Each launch of at least four billion dollars is likely to cost, four times the initial estimates. Although it exceeds the cost of private sector businesses several times, the agency can only start almost once every two years, and the rocket cannot be reused, unlike the Missiles of the SpaceX business. NASA space takes a barrier in the face, even if the ‘spatial launch system’ is completed, there remains an obstacle; The rocket is not strong enough to transfer someone in the current formation to the moon. Instead, he will place his capsule, ‘Orion’ in orbit known as ‘Semi -Strakight Aura’. From there, the capsule (which, despite spending $ 20 billion, still contains a flawed thermal shield), must comply with the landing vehicle that will transport astronauts to the moon. The delivery of this spacecraft to an orbit, before it can be pressed to the moon to meet ‘Orion’, is in itself a complicated process. Simply put, “Artemis” is not the easy project; There are many possible problems. This is before NASA added to the equation, its new space station called Gateway, which will cost more than $ 5 billion, with annual maintenance expenses estimated at a billion dollars, and it has no clear justification. The idea is that ‘Orion’ can handle the ‘gate’ in future missions, to get out of two spatial pioneers to take the landing vehicle, while the rest of the crew waits for the station to monitor their colleagues while collecting rocks. Unfortunately, the matter doesn’t stop there. The building of the ‘gate’, NASA adds a second phase to the ‘spatial launch system’, called ‘Block 1B’, of which the implementation has been delayed six years of the date, and is expected to cost $ 5.7 billion, increasing launch costs by one billion dollars per time. To adapt to the second phase, the agency is working to build a new launch tower called “ML-2” (ML-2), and is expected to cost $ 2.7 billion, ie seven times more than preliminary estimates, and there is no expected date to complete it. (The company, which builds the tower, has provided government accounts of 850,000 hours over the past two years). Is Artemis needed? The irony here is that none of this is not necessary. It is very likely that the SpaceX spacecraft is capable of transporting goods and robots directly to space, at a much lower cost, and without the need for the space-rising system, nor “Orion” or the Moon gate, nor “blocking OneP” or “M-2”. The descent of the “Starsp” missile was successfully a penetration that showed the extent of the “SpaceX” business to NASA. At the same time, NASA or the postponing of promising scientific programs is canceled when Artemis consumes more part of her budget. Among these programs is the “Veritas” mission to Venus, the lunar vehicle “Viber”, and the “new surveyor” telescope designed to investigate the solar system in search of dangerous asteroids. The taxpayers and the congress must ask: What do we do? The next president must be held liable for answers.