ANGRY AT NASA!

[spiknter]

I don't mind seeing other countries having their own space program but I do want to see Nasa having a substantial impact on missions, technologies etc.

 

[majoraward]

I don't think it is a question of being angry at NASA. There is no question that we could be living the 21st Century dream as in 2001 a Space Odyssey movie with the fancy space station, sending humans to the far reaches of the solar system, having a large Moon base, that kind of thing. The people of NASA want this stuff, that is their dream, but it takes money. The priorities of the American people is what I am angry at, it is because the majority believe, incorrectly, that the money could be put to better use on Earth.

When people are led to believe that conservation of resources is a good thing, that it will somehow make us prosper, then that type of thinking stifles progress. It should not take a planetary scientist to make the observation that the solar system is full of natural resources that are there for the taking. The moon Titan for an example has lakes of methane and ethane, some are larger than the great lakes, seas really. Just one of these lakes could supply the entire planet with energy for hundreds of years.

So if I were going to be angry about the progress we are making in space, and I am, I would put the blame on educators, on Congress, on the American people for their lack of imagination, for their lack of foresight, and their lack of initiative. Now we have to live with another Apollo type capsule for manned flight which is truly the beginning of the end for a national manned space program but maybe it has always been doomed. I am counting on private enterprise to put the money into going to space, especially when they find out that there is gold in them there hills! (planets, moons, planetoids, asteroids, Sol, etc.)

 

[Canadian]

What can I say, NASA has had no direction since the end of the Apollo program. From the almost useless shuttle program, to a low flying, super expensive space station, it has been one disappointment after another. Of course some of the the robotic missions were very successful, but there should have been many more of these to compensate for the woeful lack of progress in manned space flight.

Then again, maybe it is China and India's turn to take the technological lead for humanity, and leave the Western World behind ...

 

[Booban]

Hej, its not the general public that knows about those methane lakes.

Its up to NASA to find out about that and present a plan that looks workable to convince us (who have other jobs). The budget is only so big, therefore its even more important to stop money pits like the space station and moon landings to find out more about those lakes and present a plan on how to go there and bring it home.

And don't count on private enterprise, they are even more short sighted. China....now there is a far sighted country that will put all the national effort into making a national space industry.

Unless NASA gets it together we can only hope the Chinese can be fooled into having their space endeavours an exercise for international co operation.

 

[scwinn]

Re: ANGRY AT NASA! Yes I am. Not the Gov't. NASA!

I do NOT get it. Spacex develops completely new technology from the ground up for a fraction of the cost of NASA. NASA should be run like a for profit company and not rely on Congress. Simply build the best vehicle for the best cost and have Congress pay for rides to the ISS, the moon, Mars, whatever congress deems in the nations best interest.

Elon Musk, Richard Branson, and other visionary entrepreneurs can make a profit and break technological barriers accessing the last frontier. Why can't NASA. Sell the results NASA, not the R&D. And conduct yourself like an efficient, profit-seeking corporate citizen and we will all be better off.

 

[Architype0]

I believe, strongly, that the best course of action for NASA is to have a goal to achieve. I find myself convinced that this has been the struggle for some years now, having no clear direction to work toward and wasting time and resources doing many many things in a very mediocre manner. I think Dr. Mike Griffin's departure as director was a blow to this goal-oriented mindset, as he found himself embroiled in controversy during Barack Obama's advisor's standoff with him.

I dearly hope the agency is able to recover from this blow. I cannot speak highly enough of his credentials as a scientist, engineer, manager, administrator and visionary and he has brought a long-missing allure to the agency not altogether unlike the Apollo-era. We in the scientific community are sorry to see his departure.

Secondly, my interest in the goals of NASA's manned space program have been fomented for a number of years since it became clear to me that scaling the heavens was much more than an act in political posturing; it was (and is) the greatest representation of the human spirit. For those of us who grew up as children predisposed to a questioning nature and have, over the intervening years, evolved into scientists, engineers, doctors and entrepreneurs, the pursuit of mankind's ascent into the starlit sky is the realization of the endless pursuit of our dreams. I think of it as a pioneering spirit, analogous to climbing a mountain because it is there. Goals on orbit, on the moon, on Mars, and in the other places serve to unite us as dreamers, innovators and problem solvers eager to tackle these daunting challenges. It is for these reasons that I feel a modern NASA must have at its heart concrete goals that, though lofty in their scope, provide us with a challenge that we can, with great application, accomplish in a discrete time period.

A Future NASA: Goals and Pursuits

1. Complete the ISS and assemble a partially-reusable launch vehicle capable of servicing the ISS for no less than 10 years. Retire the shuttle and utilize the new launch vehicle (theoretically an Ares I derivative) to continue testing new spacecraft systems in LEO.

2. Commit to returning Americans to the Moon by 2020 for the purpose of scientific study. Expand the program to include international partners (ESA, JAXA, Russia, China, and Brazil) and share mission planning responsibilities and technology. Maintain good relationships with these nations based on scientific discovery, not politics. Plan for the continuous occupation of a small lunar colony. Abandon classified military aerospace projects and transfer them to appropriate US Military agencies. Guide NASA to pursue a civilian track, openly sharing publicly-funded research with the public.

3. Construct with private-interest groups (such as the Mars Society) and international collaborators a Mars mission to land no later than 2030. Plan for eventual continuous occupation of a small Martian colony. To facilitate this, develop a new partly-reusable heavy-lift launch vehicle equaling (preferably greatly exceeding) the throw weight of the Saturn V or Energia launch vehicle.

4. Form and international scientific consortium to unite aerospace and biological research sectors for the purposes of long-duration space exploration. Plan for continuous presence of humans in space. Fund the body with a combination of public and private research dollars. Mandate that all related publications be made part of the public domain.

5. Set a series of long-term goals for NASA. These may include exploring the Jovian and Saturnine systems for the purposes of resource evaluation, test-mining of near-Earth/trans-Mars asteroids, establishment of an orbiting astronomy facility in outer solar system for various wavelength examination of distant star systems and the practical consideration of interstellar flight.

I believe that these goals will serve to unify and codify the efforts of the American and international space programs. These goals will outline how we choose to live as human beings and what we can achieve with clarity of vision. These goals are obtainable, profitable and will secure the future of manned space exploration.

 

[Booban]

You ended your post with profit but the only profitable part of your goals was at the end with test-mining, lumped in together with interstellar flight.

That goal needs to be moved up front to #1 spot. I think we should be resource evaluating and test mining the moon as the primary scientific study.

If there is something there then you can set up your colony and other scientific pursuits to know everything there is to know about the moon. And if there is something there, that means that there is something out there, so Mars or Saturns moons are not far behind. All the other scientific projects will ride piggy back on the profitable endeavors.

If there is nothing at the moon, then we are free to look for it on Mars and the other places.

But if we set up a base on the moon and there is nothing there, we won't be getting any new money to fund any Mars trip. All the available funding will be locked up there and we won't be going anywhere else.

That's why we can't even go to the moon now, because all the money is locked up in the shuttle. The shuttle has to go, then the money is released to fund Ares and go to the moon, if that's the goal. Otherwise we would not have this gap between the shuttle and Ares.

Congress, jobs, the industrial base and our international partners will not let you dismantle something once built. It took the deaths of many astronauts before the shuttle gets put to rest to free up the funding to do something else.

You get this chance once every 40 years, get it right!

 

[61J_MS3]

It's not NASA's fault that Congress and a generation of Presidents have turned their backs to them. George the Lesser didn't act as if he even knew he had a space program until Columbia. Now the agency has a worn out fleet of ships and not enough money to replace them. The greatest spacefaring nation the world has ever known is about to park itself on the sidelines and hope that a cobbled together program (again badly underfunded) can get us back in orbit, maybe sometime next decade.

NASA's budget needs to be set by federal law not to be less than 1% of GNP. With that type of money we would have already replaced the shuttle with a winged orbiter vehicle, put a space station in the proper orbit to actually use to launch missions beyond earth orbit and would be well on the way back to the Moon with Mars clearly in our sites. However this would take an act of political courage and there seems to have been none of that in Washington since the Kennedy administration.

40 years later the Man in the moon is laughing at us.

 

[west_urn_enlightenment]

The Cold Path
I have been , in turns , angry at NASA, "The Government" , Congress, both political parties and with society in general, for the apparent lack of progress in space exploration. I became a scientist in part because of the powerful story That played out as man first raced to the moon. that story had the power to reach all the way into the hills of Appalachia and pull me into the larger world.
Now I realize a couple of things. first, there HAS been progress in all the area that are needed to support such efforts, from flight controls, materials science, computers ( oh, yes) and even the ability to reprogram living cells that will be needed when we succeed.
we should be angry, or better, not content. NASA could be leading this effort instead of playing technology catch-up .
Still the REAL problem is lack of vision and not by NASA ,or the Government, but by... Wait for it..
The Lack of vision is with US ! -With you and me and all the people who are informed and have yet to come up with a REASON to put our faith in space exploration. Some people get it. the people building commercial systems, the people at NASA and JPL building the deep space probes and rovers, the people who dreamed up PanStarrs and LSST and the WISE Survey scope, the horizon mission and the Dawn mission.
We need to see beyond the moon and mars and look at who we will, over the next few millennium, spread out though the solar system, into the Kuiper belt, and use those widely anticipated local brown dwarfs and planet sized bodies as stepping stones to the stars. We need to ignite our imagination...
then, and only then, can we make the point . freedom and advancement and our future lay beyond this shallow gravity well, where we evolved, and we will be responsible for putting our children on the path outward.
with a vision and a drive, then the real planning can begin. the experience we have on the ( much maligned) space station will be useful in planning long trips, the new technologies will be melded into coherent mission plans, robotic platforms will fly out in advance to pave the way and even construct resources...
but it is up to us. you may not play a big role.. but you play A role, and change will come when more people accept their role .
we poised to make great discoveries in the next five to ten years with planned missions, including the likely discovery of new and large bodies like earth sized plannets and even brown dwarf suns withing 500 Au of the sun. These are way stations on our childrens outward journey, and our guides to a planned future . -Follow this cold path to the stars.

 

[ThereIWas2]

Importing extraterrestrial hydrocarbons to burn in the Earth's atmosphere has got to be the most short sighted proposal I have seen for what to do with a space program.

 

[mikemcg]

mr_mark...lets spend more time helping to develop private space exploration. I believe we have explored the limits of a publicly funded space program thoroughly enough to know what to expect. I can only be as angry at NASA as I can be with the American public for managing it. That includes myself.

 

[spiknter]

West.....How does Nasa?, the nation?, change the ideologies of everyday americans to "make a shift" in the financial world of space?

 

[VZ]

Angry at Nasa?
Good heavens, whatever for? Have we forgotten the monumental achievents? Hubble? Spritzer? New Horizon? How bout the ISS? the mar's rovers...

Pay attention please. Unmanned programs generally are ok (though often over budget).
Manned programs are invariably disastrous. Yes, how bout ISS? It was meant to cost 8 billions. Now by various estimates it costs 35..100 billion (!!!). It was meant to start assembly in 1992, started in 1998. In 1998, it was expected to be finished by 2003, it is still not finished by by 2009.

STS has similarly appalling program history.

And these programs are considered "successful"! Look up X30, X33, X34, X-38, LFBB, SEI, OSP in wikipedia. There are all _failed_ (cancelled) development projects done by NASA manned spaceflight office. They were canceled because they either did not work, or were insanely expensive, or both. Note that a few of these programs were led by Steve Cook.

THIS IS ATROCIOUS.

We've been had by NASA human spaceflight managers, over and over and over again. They are so used to it they think we will tolerate this forever. Ares I/V trainwreck shows no signs of being any better. After all, Steve Cook is one of the leading managers of this project. This is the guy who NEVER led a development project to the successful conclusion. He is failing upwards on the ladder.

NASA does not need more $$$. It needs major cleaning up in its ranks. If it does not want to do it, it needs to be broken up, and entire "human spaceflight" part of it dismantled.

 

[VZ]

I don't understand people who complain about Congress. Congress did, and does, many stupid things, but it did give NASA a rather stable budget.

After Apollo wound down, NASA was getting about 1% of the whole budget, with little variability. This was not bad at all: when you have a fixed budget, you can better plan your actions.

This continues to this day. NASA did not have any substantial budget decreases. It get $17 billion a year. It's a fairly big sum (I can't imagine what Elon Musk would be able to do if we give these money to him!).

I don't see how NASA fans can explain its failures by having too small budget.

Building an efficient launch vehicle does not require $100bn per year. It requires sound engineering and management. Sound management is simply not present at NASA today.

Let's fire the bastards.

 

[Skibo1219]

It would be funny if NASA worked on a commission basis, they would never get paid, but the toilet seat would probably double in price from $30,000 to $60,000.

 

[ZenMasterSauce]

I don't understand people who complain about Congress. Congress did, and does, many stupid things, but it did give NASA a rather stable budget.

After Apollo wound down, NASA was getting about 1% of the whole budget, with little variability. This was not bad at all: when you have a fixed budget, you can better plan your actions.

This continues to this day. NASA did not have any substantial budget decreases. It get $17 billion a year. It's a fairly big sum (I can't imagine what Elon Musk would be able to do if we give these money to him!).

I don't see how NASA fans can explain its failures by having too small budget.

Building an efficient launch vehicle does not require $100bn per year. It requires sound engineering and management. Sound management is simply not present at NASA today.

Let's fire the bastards.

I would have to disagree and the reason is because of the idea that NASA's budget is stable. I think it does have a sense of being stable because of the decline over the years even though its still a substantial amount of money. But let's be honest, for a country as successful as we are, with a 10+ trillion dollar economy (even with the recession) we should be giving NASA significantly more resources to do their job. But their decline in budgets is the idea that what they have done or given to this country has been simply not important enough to fund. Ok, so they have strayed in their vision but that has been in part because of lack of funding and their additional lack of finding those dreamers that brought to life the moon missions. Its not to say they need a stronger firmer hand and vision, which I can proudly say Bush did one thing right was start the process of gaining that new vision. But now we have a committee addressing the nuts and bolts of the things we call NASA and the vision can come not only from the people in NASA, but the people who pay NASA the money they use.

NASA has the people, it has the capabilities, they just need to focus on giving the people of this country and earth as a whole something to push towards again. The moon is great as the possibility of humans chilling out on the dark side with shades and a martini is appealing. But they have to think beyond the Moon and specifically better technologies to move faster, cheaper, and more efficiently through space. And yes this requires getting some backbone in building ships in outer space and the what not. But it can and should be done. I think they just may gain that focus with a new president and administrator with some actual reality in their minds but challenges in their hands. Let's focus on that.

 

[pgwater]

Current funding problems and direction goes back to Vietnam, Nixon and Johnson. Could you imagine where NASA could be at right now if the escalation of Vietnam war did not take place. NASA I believed was around 5% of the budget. So at a point you can get angry at NASA but its Congress problem. Want more money pressure the people you elect into office. Start taking away votes and see what happens.

 

[bbfreakDude]

I think what people fail to realize, and the reason we haven't gone anywhere except LEO since 1972 is primarily a money and political issue. We simply as a nation aren't committed to giving NASA the funding it needs or prepared to do what is necessary to get it done, but at the same time we're most certainly not going to stop manned space flight. Mostly due to political, and strategic reasoning.

It took so little time to get to the moon because the full backing of the government was behind NASA, now they're lucky to get 9 to 10 billion annually for space exploration as is being proposed. Certainly not enough to get to the moon anytime soon.

As for the private sector, they aren't the savior. They're going to be focused on making a business model of getting people to LEO, which is going to take some time and thus they certainly aren't going beyond LEO for the next 20 years at best.

So far it looks like we may extend the shuttles lifetime, a bad idea in my opinion, and due to ISS and the lack of commitment in moving forward we aren't going beyond LEO anytime soon. Certainly not by 2020. Mars by 2030? Haha, not going to happen. We're going to be stuck in LEO till 2020 at least, with no serious proposal for going beyond LEO till sometime after.

Constellation is dead, but more importantly so is the goal of going beyond LEO.

 

[fascistguninthewest]

Seeing highlights of the Apollo 11 landing the last few weeks with the 40th anniversary on us, it got me thinking. Going to the moon pretty much shows that if we really wanted to go to the moon or mars and build cities and hotels and casinos, NASA could, if only it had about 10 trillion dollars. Are people are mad at NASA because we aren't doing this fast enough? Don't you think they dream big (or probally bigger) than you?
I'd bet my balls that if you actually went to a NASA center the people you would meet are the people who in this world dream of nothing else but flying through the stars the most. The only problem with NASA is it is GOVERNMENT FUNDED. You actually think right now that spending billions or trillions to send two guys to mars to jump around for TV is a serious consideration when our lawmakers are making their budgets? The past year has shown us that we can hardly afford to live on this planet. Health care is in shambles, fighting two wars, banks are going out of business, people are deserting their homes and can't find work. I think another round of golf on the moon is out of the question. It would probally take not much short of nuclear war on Earth to mobilize and get us a city on Mars in a few short years.
The only way I can see serious space travel and tourism taking off in my lifetime is if the private industry takes off. We've seen that alot of wealthy people will spend a few million to orbit the planet a few times, so there is definitely a market for this. I don't see why NASA doesn't go into business for profit and at least partner with someone like Virgin, unless they are fearful that move could lead to cuts in government funding. If NASA started to become profitable in some form it would be easier to cut it from the government level entirely which would kill the scientific exploration spirit of it. That said though, I'm starting to think the entire Russian space program is funded by tourists.
NASA has shown it is capable of amazing feats and if nothing else has inspired people and shown that space travel is possible. You can't really get mad at them when they are still the best in the world at what they do and actually produce results moving forward. It's not NASA's fault for the stalled feel to the entire space program, it's the governments. But really, can you blame them either?

 

[VZ]

I think what people fail to realize, and the reason we haven't gone anywhere except LEO since 1972 is primarily a money and political issue. We simply as a nation aren't committed to giving NASA the funding it needs or prepared to do what is necessary to get it done.

Why do you think giving NASA _more_ money will stop them building unsustainable rockets? If anything, more $$$ will only result in even more inefficiencies. Speaking in terms of $/kg, Shuttle is four times more expensive than Delta IV, *eight times* more expensive than Atlas V 551. I dare not think now many times it is more expensive than Falcon 9 or Soyuz!

By current estimates, Ares I will be even more expensive than Shuttle (!).

Do you really think we need to give MORE $$$ to these guys?

 

[VZ]

I would have to disagree and the reason is because of the idea that NASA's budget is stable. I think it does have a sense of being stable because of the decline over the years even though its still a substantial amount of money.

It does not have a "sense of being stable". It _is_ stable. NASA's budget is increasing in raw numbers, but in inflation-corrected dollars, it is hovering around $17bn (in 2009 dollars).

But let's be honest, for a country as successful as we are, with a 10+ trillion dollar economy (even with the recession) we should be giving NASA significantly more resources to do their job.

What makes you think more dollars will make them do their job?

 

[beblebrox]

I have enough anger to go around for everyone: NASA, Congress, the American public, and some of the science community as well. Congress has used NASA as a pork program for their districts for years to buy votes; rather than give NASA the money it needs and let them decide how best to achieve their goals. A lot of high profile management in NASA seems to have been staffed by mindless bureaucrats, environmental nut jobs, and evangelists of robotic exploration; instead of visionary explorers who are willing to go over the heads of the President and Congress and go directly to the American public to try and convince and inspire them as to why we need to be heading out into our solar system, and eventually to the stars. I blame the American public for all to often becoming complacent and jaded about pretty much any public endeavor. It seems as if as long and American Idol is on tv and milk and eggs are cheap at the grocery store, absolutely nothing inspires; nothing is bigger than us and our petty individual insular concerns.

The problem is that the manned space program became routine and mundane, with no sense of moving forward. Ever since Skylab, we have been going in circles in LEO looking down at Earth, where we just came from, instead of up and out, in the direction we should have been heading. To be honest I am tired of hearing all the crap about how Earth looks so fragile from 200 miles up. If it's so darn fragile shouldn't we (and by we i mean all of the groups i mentioned above) be even more motivated to get some of us off the planet and not put all of our eggs in one basket, so to speak?

We have put little carts on Mars that we all to often anthropomorphize into something akin to Wall-E (remember Sojourner?). That is all well and good. The science returned is tantalizing ; but only so in how it should inspire and motivate us to go ourselves. Pioneer and Voyager have given us a When I see the photos with Columbia Hills in the background, I am not thinking about how great the technology is that got those images to me, or of it's alien beauty. I think "I wonder what the heck is on the other side of those hills?" Humanity is by it's very DNA inquisitive. It is hard wired into the very essence of our being to be explorers. Why go to Mars and beyond? Because it's there, as the mountain climber said. No one else lives here. The solar system, except perhaps for some simple forms of bacteria or the like, is pretty much as vacant as a new housing plan waiting for the owners to move in. It belongs to humanity as a whole. It is our collective birthright and destiny to explore it, and eventually settle it.

Space used to be beyond politics. It was something right and left, rich and poor, black and white alike could be inspired with and be given a sense of pride and awe. Now all people wonder about is how much am i going to get for free from Washington, or how much are they going to take out of my paycheck now? There are no great causes anymore, and it depresses me more than it angers me.

Anyways sorry for the rant. This is something I am very passionate about and i needed to get it off my chest. Heck of a way to make you 1st post I guess.

 

[2001Kubrick]

I am not angry at NASA, but rather, our politicians who have made really bad choices over the years. First, it was a terrible mistake to invest billions in developing the Apollo program, only to abandon that capability. There were never any cost savings associated with cancellation of Apollo.

Instead, NASA is driven by money special interests that keep the contract dollars flowing their way. As such, to the politicians, NASA is not about obtaining new discoveries and knowledge, but by keeping the right contractors happy, so that campaign cash and support flow their way.

The entire system is corrupt, starting at the very top and always has been. Until we, the American people, wake up and stop electing "leaders" that value money and power over what is right for this nation, then we will continue to get more of the same.

For the same budget NASA has had all these years, Apollo could have kept going with 2 to 3 missions a year to the Moon, and eventually, we could have gone to Mars with Apollo technology. The Saturn V was big enough to launch the components needed to go to Mars.

The key element in anything successful is consistency. When you have the technology that works, do not throw it away as we did with Apollo, but instead, keep it, use it, refine it, and evolve it.

Our nation was foolish for throwing away Apollo. The name of Neil Armstrong will be remembered 5,000 years from now, but President Nixon and Congressional members who decided to throw Apollo away will have long been forgotten, and in my view, for good reason.

Spot on analysis, well done. Couldn't agree with that statement anymore.
...
I highly respect and admire NASA for what it has contributed to space exploration and humanity. I fault the politicians and leadership in this country for not rallying the people and contributing more to NASA. NASA has done a decent job with the funding it's had. What we need is a change in thinking, and this starts at the top. Bush or Obama, it doesn't matter, same thing. They are both short-sighted and self-serving politicans who don't provide anywhere near the caliber leadership we need to be on the offensive in this country in any field, let alone space exploration.

 

[bbfreakDude]

Re: ANGRY AT NASA! Yes I am. Not the Gov't. NASA!

I do NOT get it. Spacex develops completely new technology from the ground up for a fraction of the cost of NASA. NASA should be run like a for profit company and not rely on Congress. Simply build the best vehicle for the best cost and have Congress pay for rides to the ISS, the moon, Mars, whatever congress deems in the nations best interest.

Elon Musk, Richard Branson, and other visionary entrepreneurs can make a profit and break technological barriers accessing the last frontier. Why can't NASA. Sell the results NASA, not the R&D. And conduct yourself like an efficient, profit-seeking corporate citizen and we will all be better off.

Guess what, Space X has lost two customers for the Falcon 9 so far and has only had TWO successful launches with the Falcon 1. After three failures where they promptly destroyed the payload. Elon Musk has barely begun to run a successful satellite launching company.

Richard Branson? What does he have to do with anything? He had nothing to do with Spaceshipone, and as for spaceshiptwo, they're making a profit already without even having left the earth yet? Impressive! :roll:

It just irritates me that so many people have blinders on when it comes to private industry and space. Especially when they've barely done anything yet. Not that I don't wish them all the best in the world, but lets be realistic people.

 

[bbfreakDude]

Space used to be beyond politics.

Wrong, it was always about politics. The whole reason behind the space race for example was politically motivated, the only damn reason we went to the moon is to show our technological superiority to the Russians as it was deemed strategically important to do so. Once we realized not only had we won, but that they had no chance in hell in catching up. Well, we gave up.