|
Post by rick on Apr 20, 2010 14:30:00 GMT -4
I caught a glimpse of Obama's speach about what lies ahead for the space program. He seems to be cutting the space program to shreds. I had to turn away when he mentioned not returning to the moon by "we have already been there.... we need to look beyond"
It does not seem like a good idea to me.
WHat do you think?
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Apr 20, 2010 14:46:08 GMT -4
Going to the moon seems to hold little benefit as a waypoint in getting crews to Mars. From that perspective, developing the Orion and building long term habitation on the moon will be a distraction. Whether NASA will ever be given the funding needed to develop an interplanetary ship is, of course, not at all certain.
It is unclear to me what the actual science benefits from the Orion program would be and whether they would be worth the cost or exceed what could be obtained through research in other areas. I suppose one can not quantify that, which is why so much science research is funded by the government. Although we do know that NASA is a huge jobs program for highly paid people.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 20, 2010 15:37:32 GMT -4
I think it's a tremendous blow to our national prestige that we now have to rent seats from the Russians to reach the International Space Station, with no replacement for the shuttle in sight. And I think there is really no way to tell what we could learn by going back to the moon. Surely that's one of the points in going back? And I had best not say much about my opinion of President Obama's "vision".
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Apr 20, 2010 18:12:13 GMT -4
I caught a glimpse of Obama's speach about what lies ahead for the space program. He seems to be cutting the space program to shreds. I had to turn away when he mentioned not returning to the moon by "we have already been there.... we need to look beyond" It does not seem like a good idea to me. WHat do you think? I think it would be wonderful if NASA could do everything we want them to do without worrying about the cost, but in reality NASA is forced to make tough choices because their budget is too small. If you could only afford to go on one vacation every five years would you keep going back to the same place until you've learned everything there is to learn about it, or would you try to maximize the amount of exploring you can do on your budget by going somewhere different?
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Apr 20, 2010 21:58:18 GMT -4
We will now have a manned space program without a space vehicle, or even plans for one.
How did we get in this mess?
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Apr 20, 2010 23:14:39 GMT -4
Blame Nixon.
His administration cut the other components of the Space Transportation System and only built the LEO-pickup truck portion. So we're finally retiring a fleet of Ford F-100 trucks, but we never got the minivan or sports car that was s'posed to be part of the package.
Then blame Carter for being in charge of a crappy economy. Then blame Reagan for "wasting" time and money on "star wars" and spending the USSR to death. Continue ad nausium to the current POTUS.
And then you blame all the congress critters between 1968 and now who wanted to "cut the budget" and "limit spending," while wasting massive amounts of cash on totally stupid things (pick your favorites).
The AIG bailout would have funded NASA at current levels for 10 years. Remember the AIG bonuses that were paid out? Big kerfluffle over that. The amount paid out by AIG, in order to not be in breach of contract with those execs? One third of one shuttle launch.
So blame the American population for voting with a deeply polarized narrow set of self interests for the last 30 years an electing a bunch of nitwit lawyers.
I predict we'll buy seats from the Russians for a few years, and then "decide to turn over our interest in the ISS to the international community at large." At which point we might as well start calculating a de-orbit path. I'd love to see the ISS used until it's as worn-out and stinky as the MIR was, but I doubt it will be given that good of a life.
Space seems expensive, and it's totally optional spending. But we've never spent as much on it as we could have, if we'd honestly set our minds to it whole-heartedly. The Apollo program was a great one-shot, but it wasn't a great start of a great future. Frankly, the Viking and Voyager missions did a better job of doing broad science and paving for the future.
We'll see the Chinese on the moon next.
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Apr 21, 2010 2:40:28 GMT -4
To quote Jim Lovell in the movie Apollo 13, "Imagine if Christopher Columbus had come back from the New World and no one returned in his footsteps." If we are going to go out into space, to swim in the cosmic ocean, and not merely dip our toes in the deepest abyss, we are going to need infrastructure.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Apr 21, 2010 5:23:13 GMT -4
I think it would be wonderful if NASA could do everything we want them to do without worrying about the cost, but in reality NASA is forced to make tough choices because their budget is too small. President Kennedy summed up the cost of the Apollo programme nicely in his speech at RICE University on 12 September 1962. Immediately following his famous "We choose to go to the moon..." words, he said: What does 50 cents per week in 1962 come to in modern figures?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 21, 2010 11:17:50 GMT -4
Then blame Reagan for "wasting" time and money on "star wars" and spending the USSR to death. Well, since it did get rid of the USSR I wouldn't call it a total waste. It would have been nice if we could have gotten space travel back on its feet again at the same time, though.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 21, 2010 11:25:56 GMT -4
What does 50 cents per week in 1962 come to in modern figures? By the consumer price index, about $3.50.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Apr 21, 2010 13:01:40 GMT -4
I think it's a tremendous blow to our national prestige that we now have to rent seats from the Russians to reach the International Space Station, with no replacement for the shuttle in sight. Another side of this is that there are benefits to trade in any industry. It simply may be cheaper to hire out for what is simply a mature technology.
And I think there is really no way to tell what we could learn by going back to the moon. That’s the rub; the benefits of a major lunar program are kind of a pig in a poke. We know what it will cost but have little certainly of what we are really getting. Basic science always is a risk, but we must somehow weigh relative advantages.
The AIG bailout would have funded NASA at current levels for 10 years.
The AIG and other financial bailouts will not be a total loss, much of the money will be recovered. The other thing about the AIG bailout is that if it hadn’t occurred, there is a good likelihood it would have led to a chain of collapses of significant retrenchment for an array of large commercial and investment banks that would have shut down the primary debt market. The resulting fall out for that could have been widespread defaults on public debt by credit worthy companies because of illiquidity in the financial markets. Had this scenario played out it would have been far more costly.
If we never go to space again, we will give up potential benefits for real cost savings but won’t notice the absence of those benefits. That is just the way the politics is playing right now. The fifties and sixties were a unusual time in the world.
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Apr 21, 2010 14:09:59 GMT -4
Then blame Reagan for "wasting" time and money on "star wars" and spending the USSR to death. Well, since it did get rid of the USSR I wouldn't call it a total waste. It would have been nice if we could have gotten space travel back on its feet again at the same time, though. Yes, dear. Note the quotes, it's called sarcasm.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Apr 23, 2010 7:34:43 GMT -4
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 23, 2010 11:45:27 GMT -4
Mediocraty, eh? As far as manned spaceflight goes, I wonder if we haven't been there since Apollo.
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Apr 23, 2010 16:22:49 GMT -4
Mediocraty, eh? As far as manned spaceflight goes, I wonder if we haven't been there since Apollo. Well, the space shuttle is hardly mediocre, it was a daring idea that didn't pan out due to too high expectations and budget constraints, IMHO. What we have is more like stasis in NASA manned space flight, expensively going nowhere fast. At least the Russians are going cheaply nowhere fast.
|
|