Posted on 02/08/2005 8:40:53 AM PST by vannrox
While NASA fared better than many federal agencies in U.S. President George W. Bush's 2006 budget request, the White House is not seeking as much money for the U.S. space agency as previously planned.
The White House is seeking $16.45 billion for NASA in the 2006 budget. That's an increase of 2.4 percent over what the U.S. space agency has in its 2005 budget, but still about $500 million less than what the agency had been expecting.
When Bush gave NASA a new space exploration vision last year, he also pledged to help pay for it with three straight years of roughly 5 percent budget increases. Bush -- with help from House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) -- delivered on that promise for 2005, but his 2006 request forecasts much more modest increases through the end of the decade.
NASA's 2006 budget request, which is headed to Congress Feb. 7, keeps many of the agency's space exploration goals on track, but a number of high-profile efforts have been canceled, postponed or scaled back.
The biggest casualty of NASA's latest budget request is the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO) mission, which is effectively canceled in the 2006 request. NASA had planned to launch the multi-billion dollar probe around 2015 as the Project Prometheus nuclear power and propulsion initiative's flagship demonstration.
NASA officials now say JIMO is too ambitious an undertaking for an initial demonstration, and a search for an alternative mission is underway. NASA is still requesting $320 million to continue nuclear power and propulsion work in 2006, but that is substantially lower than the roughly $500 million the agency had planned to spend based on last year's five-year budget projection.
NASA also has trimmed its request for Project Constellation, which is intended to develop a Crew Exploration Vehicle that can transport astronauts to the Moon.
NASA Comptroller Steven Isakowitz, briefing reporters ahead of the formal budget release, said the $1.1 billion the agency is seeking is enough to keep development of the Crew Exploration Vehicle on track for a 2014 delivery. He said NASA still intends to award at least two design contracts later this year and hold a 2008 fly-off that will determine who gets the contract to build the multi-billion dollar vehicle.
Spending on the space shuttle program is expected to drop to $4.3 billion in 2006 after topping out at $5 billion this year. That $5 billion figure includes $760 million tied to improvements made in the wake of the February 2003 Columbia accident. Still, NASA's 2006 request for the shuttle program is about $200 million higher than what the agency had previously forecast.
NASA's budget request includes no money for any type of Hubble Space Telescope servicing mission, as first reported by Space News. Instead NASA is seeking $75 million to continue development of a deorbit mission the agency needs to launch around the end of the decade to steer the giant telescope safely into the ocean once it is no longer capable of doing science. The agency also is asking for an additional $20 million to investigate ways short of launching a space shuttle or robotic repair mission to keep the telescope in service as long as possible. Hubble is expected to go dark in 2007 or 2008 as critical components fail.
Isakowitz said the agency recently decided that there is not enough time to mount a robotic repair mission that stands a good chance of saving Hubble.
A National Academy of Sciences panel reached the same conclusion in December and recommended that NASA reinstate a space shuttle servicing that the space agency canceled last year citing safety concerns. Isakowitz said NASA still thinks repairing Hubble is not worth risking the lives of astronauts. "We know the academy reached a different conclusion," he said. "We don't agree with the academy on their findings." Among other budget highlights:
NASA's Science Mission Directorate would get about $5.5 billion in 2006, a budget that Isakowitz said keeps the James Webb Space Telescope on course for a 2011 launch, continues the development of robotic missions to the Moon and Mars, and adequately funds a number of ongoing Earth science programs.
NASA's Aeronautics Mission Directorate would see its budget drop to $850 million in 2006, marking the beginning of a steady decline that pares the directorate back to $700 million by decade's end.
We need to roll NASA into the military, and dedicate it to setting up bases on the Moon and Mars. It seems to me that satellite launching can best be done by private companies, and getting NASA out of the business will accelerate private space exploration.
What good is NASA anyway? There is nothing out there except empty space and some rocks. Let us feed the hungry and help them multiply first. Soy-lent! Soy-lent!
The "global warming" research funding is money poured down a rathole and should be killed off completely.
If nasa knew how to allocate its recourses, 16B would be WAY more than enough. NASA is getting on my nerves.. all this whining is pathetic.
2014 before we have a manned moon mission? Hell, China will own the moon by then.
Let's get serious, NASA
I am trying to continue liking NASA, but, BOY!!, are they making it hard - especially under O'Keafe. I would rather see more money spent to maintain the Hubble and less on the Shuttle and the ISS. Both have been a colossal waste of time and money that have done little to advance our knowledge of the galaxy, the universe or anything more than 300 miles from the earth's surface.
NASA should be looking over its collective shoulder with private development starting to nip at its heels. Chances are that people like Sir Richard Branson at Virgin Air and similar innovators will surpass anything that NASA will do in developing the moon or other planets to support human habitation. If O'Keafe and NASA were around when the US was still being settled, we would still be launching boats across the Mississippi to be sure it was safe before allowing settlers to cross. The funny thing is that, at the rate that NASA is going, Richard Branson will be there to greet the next NASA astronaut(s) to land on the moon. He will invite the astonauts to his quarters, serve them drinks, dinner and go for a refreshing dip in his pool.
Afterward, the astronauts will, reluctantly, return to their cramped capsule and face a meal of dehydrated "tastes-like-crap" before snuggling down to sleep on a narrow, uncomfortable "couch" that also serves as their chair during spaceflight. Branson, will settle down in a king size bed with two blondes and a large dog.
Me? I'll take Branson's version of spaceflight to NASA's.
Let's get it on and stop fiddling around with their overpriced, dangerous space trucks (Shuttle) and their (barely) flying habittrail for humans and get back to the business of exploring the stars.
"Branson, will settle down in a king size bed with two blondes and a large dog. "
No wonder he's interested in space - bestiality is frowned upon down here in the gravity well!
The shuttle is to space exploration what a tapeworm is to your metabolism.
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.