NASA Alt Budget for Outer Planet Probes or lunar lander (edited)

[Byeman]

Cassini cost about $4 billion for spacecraft, launch and 20 years of operation. Europa Clipper is projected to be $5.2 Billion for 5 years of ops. Pluto New Horizons has yet to reach $1billion. Juno is about $1.5 billion. Mars Science Laboratory, not an outer planet probe but nuclear powered spacecraft/rover with 15 years of ops, costs to date is $2.5 billion. So, let just say 2 to 6 billion dollars to do an outer planet probe. Using a 5 years mission development cycle, JPL, APL and Goddard together could produce 3 missions every 5 years. So roughly, 9 missions since 2010/2011. That is 18 to 54 billion dollars. Not every mission is going to 2 or 6 billion, so average at 4 for $36 billion. And all the money is not spent within the 5 years of development, ops money is spread out for the duration of the missions.

It just so happens that since 2011, SLS total budget is approximately $32 billion and KSC EGS has spent about $7 billion for SLS infrastructure. That is quite a lot of money for planetary missions. A little more than $36 billion I have projected. The extra can be used for RTG development. 9 is a lot for 5 planets, maybe we go back to Mercury and Venus with two of the missions. Or do missions like Pioneer Venus with a flyby/orbiter spacecraft and a separate launched spacecraft with atmospheric probe.
No new launch vehicles would be required since Atlas V, Delta IV and Falcon Heavy could have handled them. There might be some spacecraft testing facility scheduling constraints. Maybe another nuclear material rated facility would be needed at the launch site but there is plenty of budget for that.

But 9 missions (with a few in the Cassini/Europa Clipper class) without SLS or EUS.

 

[publiusr]

The old "I could find more funding of my center's project by killing yours" routine. A false choice. Artemis II is the best use of American tax dollars this whole year.

 

[Byeman]

Which is "my center"? What false choice? The Discovery and New Frontier programs are managed by Planetary Missions Program Office at Marshall. JPL, APL and Goddard are listed. KSC would provide the launch services.

A false claim is that Artemis II was the "best" use of tax dollars. It was a mission that neither advanced spaceflight technology or science. Again, it just provided for employment in certain congressional districts. Non human spaceflight is more diverse and spread out than human spaceflight.

And by the time Artemis IV will flies, there will be launch vehicles capable of replacing SLS. So instead of wasting 30-40 billion dollars and 15-20 years on a rocket with limited utility and likely only 5-7 flights ever. NASA could have been flying many flagship planetary missions biding its time waiting for large commercial launch vehicles to come on line. And the return to the moon wouldn't be any later.

 

[Byeman]

Or NASA should have worked on a lunar lander vs SLS. Most launch vehicle expertise is now in industry vs at NASA. NASA still has most expertise on off world landers.