The Crew Exploration Vehicle project that is intended to take man to the moon again has a name and logo: Orion.

A proposed logo of the CEV project with the name "Orion" and marked "approved" has been seen in an internal NASA document. Other reports have NASA applying for trademark protection for "Orion." The Orion constellation features on the logo, along with a blue globe and red orbital vector.

This is the latest nomenclature to be associated with NASA's space exploration programs. The entire moonshot project (as well as the Mars exploration mission) is codenamed "Constellation", with Orion associated with the CEV component. "Ares" refers to the launch vehicle family (Ares I being the crew launcher and Ares V the heavy-lift launcher). Prior reports had NASA designating the separate command/service module and moon lander as "Altair" and "Artemis", respectively, until superceded by this report.

“NASA’s current acquisition strategy for the CEV places the project at risk of significant cost overruns, schedule delays, and performance shortfalls because it commits the government to a long-term product development effort before establishing a sound business case,” writes the Government Accountability Office (GAO) of NASA's plan to award the CEV prime contract to either Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman-Boeing by August 31. Yet despite these warnings, NASA still decided to proceed with readying, developing, and producing the Space Shuttle-replacement.

Here is what NASA spokesman Michael Braukus has to say about GAO's report (entitled “NASA: Long-Term Commitment to and Investment in Space Exploration Program Requires More Knowledge,”): “We do not concur with GAO’s recommendation that the NASA administrator modify the CEV acquisition strategy. The agency’s business approach is consistent with the GAO’s recommendation and NASA is confident that its acquisition strategy and plans for selecting a CEV prime contractor are based on a sound business case and are in the government’s best interest.”

GAO, however, thinks otherwise. The agency noted that NASA is acting prematurely, pushing a CEV procurement even before developing a sound business case like well-defined requirements, preliminary design, mature technology, and firm cost estimates. GAO's worries do not end there. They are also questioning NASA's financial ability to return to the Moon by 2020.

NASA has been warned. If they choose to move forward with the CEV acquisition let us just hope that, contrary to GAO's predictions, their decision will reap good results.

We already assumed that there would be major setbacks to the scientific community with the (nasty) budget cut NASA received, but we never really though the impact would be as bad as the Space Frontier Foundation says it would be.

This space advocacy group has just submitted its assessment regarding NASA's space exploration plans - and what they're saying is far from good. Titled "Unaffordable and Unsustainable - NASA's failing Earth-to-Orbit Transportation Strategy," this, for one, calls for the immediate elimination of work on Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) block 1 and for the delay of Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) program.

The CEV Block 1 has been designed for ISS missions, which according to the group should be handed to private space firms.

According to Space Frontiers Foundation, NASA should also be considering taking more private partners if they intend to continue with space exploration. The agency should buy a service from US companies, as NASA doesn't have the capability to build, develop and operate crew or cargo missions anymore.

Space Frontier Foundation is also calling for the government to transfer $2B to $3B to the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program which currently has a budget of just $500M until 2010. This will result to additional COTS competition, promoting six to eight more contracts.

Their major concern, according to Space Frontier Foundation's co-founder Rick Tumlinson, is that science might also suffer if NASA's incapability (budget, engineering, space access systems) starts to affect space exploration.

After sifting through a number of name books for babies born on earth and heaven, doting NASA officials finally settled on a name for their rockest bound for the Moon and Mars: Ares. Ares is the Greek God of War also known as Mars by the Romans.

Ares 1 and Ares 5 are expected to take future astronauts and heavy cargo back to the Moon and beyond. The first unmanned Ares test flight is expected in 2009. Piloted test is set for 2014. Ares 1 will serve as NASA’s Crew Launch Vehicle and will launch the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), a 25-ton capsule-based spacecraft designed to ferry astronauts to the ISS and Moon. Ares 5 will be NASA's Cargo Launch Vehicle capable of boosting a 45-ton lunar lander and a rocket stage to ferry the lander and CEV to the Moon.

“This is the first wave of center assignments for getting Constellation rolling,” said Jeff Hanley, NASA’s Constellation program manager, referring to its announcement last Monday about the roles of its 10 regional field centers on the development of the Crew Exploration Vehicle. Constellation is the multibillion-dollar effort of the agency to  build the CEV, launchers and landing spacecraft needed to put U.S. astronauts on the Moon by 2020.

Overall responsibility for the CEV remains at (1) Johnson Space Center in Houston, but there are other centers joining forces to make Constellation successful.

On top of the list is the (2) Glenn Research Center in Cleveland that has the responsibility of developing the CEV Service Module. (3) Ames Research Center in California, is going to be responsible for developing the CEV's thermal protection system, while neighbor (4) Dryden Flight Research Center has been assigned the task of flight testing the CEV's launch abort system.

Langley engineers from (5) Langley Research Center in Hampton will oversee and conduct independent analysis if the CEV prime contractor’s development of a launch abort system. (6) Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala., is leading development of the Crew Launch Vehicle, with (7) Stennis Space Center in Mississippi responsible for testing engines for both the crew launcher and an unmanned heavy-lift launcher.

The chosen launch site, (8) Kennedy Space Center will host NASA’s Ground Operations Project. Communications, navigation and avionics work is under (9) Goddard Space Flight Center while responsible for all of the agency’s robotic landers of late, the (10) Jet Propulsion Laboratory will lend its expertise in robotic surface operations to the NASA’s human exploration efforts.

The Space Shuttle is set to retire by 2010 and NASA is seeking a CEV to pass the Space Shuttle's baton to. Two teams, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman/Boeing, are up for the picking. Both have already submitted their respective proposals and are tight-lipped about it.

"We’re clearly in a competition. I don’t feel it’s the right time to be coming out with a lot of details about how we plan to tackle the job," said Doug Young, Vice President and CEV Program Manager at Northrop Grumman.

As expected both teams are claiming that they are what NASA is looking for and are not afraid to let their competition have some dose of trash (or space) talking.

"We think we are offering NASA a really good team," said Art Stephenson, Sector Vice President, Space Exploration Systems, Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems. "Our proposal is focused on what’s the best answer for the taxpayer and for NASA." While on the other camp, John Karas, Vice President of Space Exploration for Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company declares, "Everything except the shape [of CEV] is brand new. It’s not your daddy’s Oldsmobile."

NASA keeps mum about the issue by saying that they are currently evaluating proposals and plan to down select and award the Phase 2 contract in the August/Spetember time frame. "All other information is competition sensitive and will not be provided at this time," said Michael Braukus, a NASA Headquarters spokesman.