Posted on 06/13/2010 9:18:32 PM PDT by Mad Dawgg
Nasa has begun to wind down construction of the rockets and spacecraft that were to have taken astronauts back to the Moon — effectively dismantling the US human spaceflight programme despite a congressional ban on its doing so.
Legislators have accused President Obama’s Administration of contriving to slip the termination of the Constellation programme through the back door to avoid a battle on Capitol Hill.
Constellation aimed to build upon what was arguably America’s greatest technological achievement, the first lunar landing of 1969, by launching new expeditions to the Moon and to Mars and worlds beyond. Mr Obama proposed in February that it should be scrapped because it was “over budget, behind schedule and lacking in innovation”, but he has met opposition in Congress, which has yet to approve his plan.The head of Nasa, Major-General Charlie Bolden — an Obama appointee — has now written to aerospace contractors telling them to cut back immediately on Constellation-related projects costing almost $1 billion (£690 million), to comply with regulations requiring them to budget for possible contract termination costs.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
We chose not to go to Cuber because it was haaaaahd.
I am not anti-NASA nor against manned space travel. I just think that for exploring the planets and moons of our solar system and beyond that we get a lot more bang for the buck going with unmanned probes right now.
We might have technology but I don’t think we have it developed well enough yet to consider a manned trip to Mars. Going back to the Moon I guess, but what is the use right now?
//develop a base on the moon and prepare for that being a jump-off point for missions to Mars//
If you are going to do that why not just pour all those resources into a direct trip to Mars and back?
Obama aside, is there any who really believes we would have been back on the moon by 2020 for anywhere near the costs they were talking about?
We don't have the money for luxuries anymore. Heck, in reality we don't have the money for necessities.
NASA's "vision" is always that of the president and/or his administration. The problem is that NASA's projects always necessarily transcend presidential terms, so the vision shifts with every election. If we want NASA to have a vision, then we should insist (as Congress did when they wrote into the law that funded Constellation, a limitation on the president's ability to cancel it) the president stop playing politics with the agency.
Going back to the Moon as designed by NASA is a reprise of a magnificent stunt. Let us do something new.
Since the end of Apollo, NASA has been about maintaining the standing army of staff. It is now a great hindrance to the development of private efforts.
The government needs to fund the development of a heavy lift system, mostly for the military and lots of X projects. Single stage to orbit systems, high specific impulse (ion) propulsion systems and nano sized science probes would be a good targets for X projects.
The valuable but long term payoff science and exploration projects can piggy back on those projects.
And one of the main characteristics of porkerized activity are the likes of ATK - companies with one customer who are the sole source for what they do.
The real challenge for a future space program is to keep every one of our 535 Congressthings from packing pork into every nook and cranny of the launch vehicle.
Yesterday I saw a car with an "Obama '08" sticker and a "NASA: I Need My Space sticker."
“Failure Is Our Only Option”
yeah right...I bet the president of Spain or king over Columbus was not taxing his people something like 20-50% and in debt of an equaivalent 14 trillion $! Come on now, get real! And I am not whining. I don’t like it how people , when met with strong disapproval of their pet projects, call it whinning so as to denegrade the valid point given. Just stop it.
But it isn't a valid point. This is the part you are missing. If NASA hadn't done what it did you wouldn't have most of the technology we use today. Satellite communications, much of the tech used today in the medical fields, and down to even mundane stuff like microwave ovens. All of that stuff and more came out of the space program as either a direct result or from ancillary research.
Unlike most of the money spent by the Government (not including Defense spending) the money spent at NASA begets all sorts of useful tech because the very nature of operating in an environment where one most create their own power and bring all the things one needs to survive up through the gravity well spurns more efficient system from food prep to energy use and production.
The tech a another trip to the moon as well as building a permanent Base would be worth 10 times more than whatever costs we would incur over the long haul. Not to mention the ability use the resources the moon has to offer. The surface of the moon is coated with H3 which is a highly efficient fuel to run nuke reactors and puts less wear on the system AND reduces the danger of nuke reactor meltdowns by multitudes.
H3 alone is worth the effort of the trip and that is just the beginning. So when you speak of waste when talking about money spent on NASA you are wrong. NASA produced technology that makes our world better stuff you use everyday. Now can they be more efficient no doubt but without NASA blazing the trail just like Columbus did we the USA won't get to the New World. And as Newton said a body either expands or contracts it is never at rest and the USA has no more room to expand on this planet therefore we either find a New World on which to expand and grow and learn or we are doomed to suffer the downward spiral that all great nations of history have met.
Oh and BTW Queen Isabella of Spain was a heavy taxer and (she financed Spain's wars with taxes) but she was smart enough to realize the riches of a New World could be Spain's for the taking if she spent tax money on Columbus's trip to seek out the New World. And it paid off handsomely for Spain in Gold and Silver alone. (Just like our financing of the First Trip to the moon paid off!)
"The federal government has no more business running a space program than it does running a railroad. NASA should go back to its original mission of R&D and leave manned spaceflight to private industry."
Do you think any Country will allow a private Corporation to Colonize the Moon? The moon is the first stop on our journey to other planets. It will be our testing grounds for building viable habitats on distant planets. And the only way anyone is going to get there and establish a Colony is if a Nation goes and establishes the first one. All the NASA naysayers would have China or Russia or India be the ones to establish such. Just because President Obama has decided to quit doesn't mean the space race is over. It just means China and Russia and India and others are grinning from ear to ear because the guy that is 100 laps in the lead has decided to not run anymore.
Brilliant plan.
The only freepers against manned space are the extreme moonbats that give conservatives a bad name.
Well, why cant private enterprise do the job that nass has done? I say it very well could have for muvh less money and it would have done only the money making and neccessary. Endlessly flying to the space station and such is a waste and in csse you hsve not noticed, We DO NOT HAVE EVEN THE FRONT MONEY ANYMORE. Therre are plenty of wonerful inventiions, including our cell phones that were made without the government.
Funny you should use that phrase.
Ever hear Burt Rutan discuss NASA? He always pronounces it "Nay-Say".
As in: if your rocket plan doesn't throw gigabucks at an existing contractor, one with lots of Congressional juice, the answer will always be "Nay".
The Planetary Society has been supporting Obama.
What’s wrong with these people?
Next year we’ll be paying $55 million a head just to visit our space station (I say our because we ended up paying for almost all of it).
The only freepers against manned space are the extreme moonbats that give conservatives a bad name.
I don't know about that. I mean, I do know that I see many FReepers disagreeing with me on many things, all the time. So, that's nothing new. I think all you're describing is that you've got FReepers disagreeing with you and you think they are "moonbats" because of that ... LOL ...
BUT, I think I've found the very "common element" for all Freepers, in spite of their many disagreements.
The "common agreement" for all FReepers -- is -- very simply, they don't want the government spending money on anything. It just varies as to what that "anything" is for the various FReepers. :-)
See Post #43 ... for how it works ... LOL ...
Yeah, ‘anything’ certainly doesn’t include military. I’m a fiscal conservative, but I can also read. I can read that NASA’s budget even with a moon program is 1/10th the stimulus and would actually produce results.
The only freepers against manned space are the extreme moonbats that give conservatives a bad name.
You might try taking that up with a fellow FReeper and ask why they are being such a "moonbat" ... LOL ...
See Post #46 ... :-)
See if you can understand the "moon-battery" that they are involved in ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.