NASA to spiral down the drain.

[DarkCloud]

NASA has a lot of different projects going on that suck money. Other countries have a lot less, so could/can focus more on spaceflight.

Still, it's disgusting that the US outspends every other country 4 times and yet is stuck with the terrible shuttle.

I had a disagreement with a relative who asserted that "oh, the Chinese are going back in time with their pod-like spacecraft- it looks like the Apollo or Gemini."

My retort: "Yes... it looks like the Soyuz from Russia. And guess what, the Soyuz is cheaper, and apparently more reliable and safe than the Shuttle. How many Russian astronauts have died since 1986 in space? vs. how many Americans?

"Guess what, the shuttle's almost always grounded and costs millions to send up, whereas the rickety Soyuzs' are still going up. And heavens, the new Orion looks more like the Chinese design than the wasteful Shuttle."

[Kuciwalker]

Manned space missions

Throwing tons of money at NASA

[Ben Kenobi]

Agree with the budget cut, disagree with Obama's rationale.

I'd rather see money spent on Nasa, then on other places, which are going to be Obama's pet pork.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut


I don't know where you're planning to colonize in the outer solar system. Mars is enough of a pipedream already.

Yeah, sure thing buddy,

Originally posted by DanS
NASA's cost structure impedes it from doing the really cool stuff like setting up permanent moon bases. Apollo was a seriously large expenditure and merely repeating the feat would be a burden nowadays.

You can tell it's bad when NASA's cost structure is about 4x the cost structure inherited from the communists. I think you'll excuse my cynicism that a government agency will cut its cost structure substantially.

And it still does it order of magnitudes better than private industry.

[DarkCloud]

Lonestar? Then why is NASA contracting everything out?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23243650/

Private industry is supposed to fill the gap between the shuttle's retirement and the Orion.

[DarkCloud]

And exactly when do you think a viable settlement could be made on mars?

Unless you believe in the Technological Singularity, such a thing is probably 100 years in the future.

First, there needs to be a purpose for people to go to mars (metals, gas, iron, resources)

Second, it needs to be a self-sustaining colony.

Third, we probably need terraforming.

--
The first prong may possibly be fulfilled if probes discover anything much of use.

But the second requires massive technological leaps.

and the third could take hundreds of years.
---
Just imagine how difficult it will be to get anything to mars.

~~~~~

-Ever been to one of the Ad Astra Space Society meetings?
...I have- even they don't seem to think settlements are going to be made on Mars until probably private industry gets involved... sometime after 2025 at the earliest (and frankly, I think that's ridiculous. At best, a human being Might land on Mars by 2030.)

[TCO]

It's a big sugar pot of engineer welfare (whether ionternal or outsourced). Just cut it. The place is full of idiots who get space shuttles killed and then try to avoid inquiries. Kill it.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Heraclitus
BTW what would happen if China does make it to the Moon and then says it found no evidence of the Apollo missions.

Google is sending someone the Apollo landing, isnt it?

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Lonestar? Then why is NASA contracting everything out?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23243650/

Private industry is supposed to fill the gap between the shuttle's retirement and the Orion.

The same reason why the Federal Government itself is contracting everyone out: It's easier to fire contractors than Government employees, and, This way the Bush Administration can talk about how "The Government shrunk(as Civil Servants begin to to hit retirement age en masse)" while not counting the nearly 10 Million Federal Contractors.

I might add that NASA very rarely builds stuff with it's own personnel. You really think the Saturn rocket and the Lunar landing components were designed solely in-house?

EDIT: To add to that, do you really think that a private corporation would be building something like what was in the article if NASA hadn't, oh, awarded the contract?

[DarkCloud]

EDIT: To add to that, do you really think that a private corporation would be building something like what was in the article if NASA hadn't, oh, awarded the contract?

Actually, Elon Musk, John Carmack and others have been firing up rockets.

The reason why private industry hasn't taken much interest in space before is...

1) Regulations relating to shooting things up in the air (The US wasn't very friendly to allowing such things to happen- note that most of the launches happen in southeast asia)
2) Where is the profit? (The Ansari X prize- privately funded- helped save some of this, but unless you have a government contract- there is no reason to go to space- nothing profitable except possibly tourism... which Virgin Galactic is trying.)
3) Patents? I would assume the companies can't infringe on or even look at a lot of classified rocketry designs that are closely held by the governments- they have to start from scratch and sometimes develop differently.

Private industry, as you prove by your statement of NASA often contracting out things, can frankly do this a lot better than a government... but only if there's a profit to be made. If there's no profit, private industry won't waste its cash.

[TCO]

People at NASA are 9 to 5er, B players. KILL IT!

[Hueij]

I suggest that you dismantle NASA, give up on space exploration all together (private industry won't take over because there is no short term profit) and descend on the road of becoming more of a third world country than you are already...

[Felch]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
My retort: "Yes... it looks like the Soyuz from Russia. And guess what, the Soyuz is cheaper, and apparently more reliable and safe than the Shuttle. How many Russian astronauts have died since 1986 in space? vs. how many Americans?

While I agree with your point, why not ask how many Cosmonauts have died since 1979 (or whenever the Shuttle was first used)? It's better to avoid cherry picking dates that correspond to tragedy.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by DarkCloud


Actually, Elon Musk, John Carmack and others have been firing up rockets.

The reason why private industry hasn't taken much interest in space before is...

1) Regulations relating to shooting things up in the air (The US wasn't very friendly to allowing such things to happen- note that most of the launches happen in southeast asia)
2) Where is the profit? (The Ansari X prize- privately funded- helped save some of this, but unless you have a government contract- there is no reason to go to space- nothing profitable except possibly tourism... which Virgin Galactic is trying.)
3) Patents? I would assume the companies can't infringe on or even look at a lot of classified rocketry designs that are closely held by the governments- they have to start from scratch and sometimes develop differently.

Private industry, as you prove by your statement of NASA often contracting out things, can frankly do this a lot better than a government... but only if there's a profit to be made. If there's no profit, private industry won't waste its cash.

Yes, and?

I'm sorry, but this is my point. Private Industry will not step in to send people to the moon or build a Hubble Space Telescope, so it falls upon government agencies to do so.

[DarkCloud]

Well, apparently http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Race#Deaths

"Since 1971, the soviet system has suffered no cosmonaut deaths."

I admit I was cherry-picking a bit, but since the second generation of Soyuz Crafts (1973-) there hasn't been any death-of-cosmonaut disaster.

One could argue that the Russians "covered up" any disasters that may have befallen from 1971-1989, but post USSR-breakup and heavens, even during the Gorbachev Glasnost era it is unlikely that anything has been covered up.

While the Soviet program had many fatalities in the 1960s, by the 70s, they cleaned it up.

America did well in the 70s and most of the 80s, then the Shuttle got old

Soyuzs' however are easier to replace. In fact, they're expendable!