The SpaceX Falcon Heavy as the basis for a low cost return to the Moon.

[Exoscientist]

NASA scientists say we could colonise the Moon by 2022... for just $10 billion.
What are we waiting for?
FIONA MACDONALD
22 MAR 2016

Quote:

All of the papers in the special edition of New Space are freely available online for you to peruse and use to plan your future in space. Get dreaming, because it's closer than you think.
"It is time to go back to this Moon, this time to stay," concludes the journal's preface. "and funding is no longer the main hurdle."

http://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-scientists-say-we-could-colonise-the-moon-by-2022-for-just-10-billion

[Rakaydos]

Interesting. So we could go to the moon to stay for 10 billion, but nasa only has  third of that for manned spaceflight.

[Nibb31]

When an article quotes "NASA scientists", you know that it's rubbish. NASA is a 20000-employee organisation with many facilities, many labs, many employees, each with their own agenda. The article quotes "Popular Science", which is famous for publishing stuff like this:

 

[fredinno]

2 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

When an article quotes "NASA scientists", you know that it's rubbish. NASA is a 20000-employee organisation with many facilities, many labs, many employees, each with their own agenda. The article quotes "Popular Science", which is famous for publishing stuff like this:

 

Yeah, at least tell us who exactly said that...

2 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

When an article quotes "NASA scientists", you know that it's rubbish. NASA is a 20000-employee organisation with many facilities, many labs, many employees, each with their own agenda. The article quotes "Popular Science", which is famous for publishing stuff like this:

 

On the other hand, this seems to be based off an actual scientific report....

Edited March 29, 2016 by fredinno

[insert_name]

that's not that bad compared to most "journalists"  from what I've heard, creating a new moon was another way of saying launching a satellite back in the early space age, would have to ask @Felbourn though

[Exoscientist]

10 hours ago, Rakaydos said:

Interesting. So we could go to the moon to stay for 10 billion, but nasa only has  third of that for manned spaceflight.

 

 That's the *total* over 5 years. Or 2 billion per year.

  Bob Clark

7 hours ago, fredinno said:

Yeah, at least tell us who exactly said that...

On the other hand, this seems to be based off an actual scientific report....

 That's why the links are there. 

   Bob Clark