I have read and reread the UPI articles and disagree with the previous assessment.
With the exception of the relacement of Goldin by O'Keefe which was a very good move, the entire plan simply doesn't cut it.
Attached is a document compiled from
https://www.astronautix.com that contains the development and launch costs of the Apollo program, its capsules and boosters, and the currently available heavy lift boosters (note the booster launch costs do not include the cost of the payloads).
Apollo cost 25 Billion in 1967 dollars. That is equivalent to about 250 Billion spent over the next 10 years or so. That's more than NASA's budget for a 10 year time period. And it will cost at least that much to go to Mars even on a Simple Mars Direct Plan.
Putting mass into LEO costs at least $10,000 a pound including the cost of the payload. Going to GEO is 3 to 4 times that price. Going to the moon and back would be at least 2 twice that cost. Being conservative, going to Mars and back will double this figure again.
Using foreign hardware is no less expensive when you consider that the hardware is only a small part of the cost of a program. The engineering, testing, integration, and staffing overwhelm the parts cost. Look at the Sea Launch Zenit 3 and the Atlas V which have very good Russian engines. The costs are not different from US hardware.
Also the US will not purchase Russian hardware directly. See how the Bush administration plans to purchase Soyuz capsules through ESA instead of directly from Russia for political reasons. That to me shows a real double standard and lack of commitment.
Nixon and Fletcher put NASA down the road on a one size fits all space craft: The Shuttle. We abandonded all other manned lift vehicles and most boosters. It was a bad idea then, and it's a bad idea now. The Bush - O'Keefe CEV looks like another one size fits all vehicle to me.
Lastly the program defies the basic laws of physics. Putting a GPS system around the Moon or Mars does not reduce the required mass for a mission. The mission duration and number of people and their supplies determine the payload mass. That and the delta V for the mission determines the fuel requirements. Orbital corrections eliminated by any kind of high precision location system would account for less than 1% of the fuel load. Just remember we landed NEAR on Asteroid EROS autonomously without any Deep Space GPS system.
The real costs shouldn't prevent us from going to Mars. It's just that our leaders have to do their homework and be honest with the Americal public. There is no free lunch. The bills we don't pay today will be paid with interest by our children in the future.
Bob Krech