Can't NASA just be shut down and remade as something else?

[lycan359]

<br />Can it be done? Should it be done?<br /><br />Just wipe the slate clean and start over with the new goal of the VSE in mind, getting rid of all the unnecessary bureaucracy in one fell swoop.<br /><br />Wouldn't it just be easier to create a new orgnization instead of trying to transform an administration into a form so different from what they have been doing for the last 25 years?<br /><br />Just my opinions.

 

[najab]

In your own words, what does NASA do?

 

[lycan359]

<br />I'm sorry? What does NASA do?<br /><br />I don't understand what you mean.

 

[najab]

You want to shut NASA down. What exactly would you be shutting down? What do they do?

 

[grooble]

It would cost millions just to change the logo.

 

[drwayne]

You made reference to "getting rid of all the unnecessary bureaucracy in one fell swoop."<br /><br />Such a statement implies you have insight into what NASA does, and what it does not need to perform its mission. Hence najaB's question - slightly rephrased - "What is it that *you* think NASA does?"<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

right now, not much. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[najab]

><i>right now, not much.</i><p>In space science alone, NASA has 30+ missions <b>in progess</b> at this moment.</p>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"In space science alone, NASA has 30+ missions in progess at this moment. "</font><br /><br />But none of them use lifting bodies... so they don't count.

 

[quasar2]

as much as i dislike some of NASA`s actions, just getting of em won`t really help anything. the problem isn`t NASA itself. it`s in how policies are carried out. part of the problem is there is no Soviet Union, therefore no cause for alarm. after Apollo there was no one to carry the torch. also we had internal (Nixon), external; for the large part (Carter) problems which bogged us down. by the time Reagan came along people pretty much forgot about Space, except perhaps Star Wars debacle. i think it was assumed we`d have Moonbase by now. & since none was ever built it was assumed to be too expensive, etc., so it became even more out of the public eye. ironically what may have brought Space "back" was Challenger. now all of a sudden after all this time, questions are being raised. we`re quite fortunate that a great many people never "strayed" away from Space. actually one of the bad things about Space development is that on paper is that it`s moved rapidly. this @least if one compares it to our development from horse & buggy. we assume we`re doing well cuz @least we`re not all still doing that. one runs into that alot w/ "moderns", a hubristic attitude. there were of course times when that came in handy. i think if there were something big motivating us you`d see see a big change in NASA or a rapid replacement. unfortunately the next "big" thing may not be something as benign as the Soviet Union. @least the Soviets respected us. & the questions begs too what would be "big"? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spacefire]

naja, can you elaborate on that and show me a source? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[najab]

http://science.hq.nasa.gov/missions/phase.html<br /><br />You do realise this is literally the first hit you get if you do a Google search, right?

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"..can you elaborate on that..."</font><br /><br />Without a web search or much time spent thinking I can come up with eight current missions: Cassini, Messenger, MER, MGS, Odyssey, Helios, Hubble, SWIFT.

 

[spacefire]

what I was hoping was to get some comparisons with the number of missions in past years.<br />I think a better way to gauge the level of activity at NASA is to compare how many missions were launched this year compared to previous years.<br />I know that overall the number of rocket launches is in decline, but I couldn't find anything to isolate NASA launches from commerical and AF launches <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"I think a better way to gauge the level of activity at NASA is to compare how many missions were launched this year compared to previous years."</font><br /><br />Easy enough. Use the link najaB gave you and record the launch date of each of the missions. Plotting them out on a yearly basis would be child's play in Excel. It's your hypothesis -- do some analyzing.

 

[nacnud]

Oh you mean do some real research?!?

 

[spacefire]

too much boring work. I get paid to do boring work, I'm not gonna do any for free. I prefer to stick to my conclusions, which I eloquently posted a while ago:<br />NASA is teh ghey! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[nacnud]

I bow to your wisdom; you must be a great scholar and grammarian <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" />

 

[spacefire]

truth be told, I am. I am learning to speak 1337 <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"I prefer to stick to my conclusions..."</font><br /><br />Yeah I have that problem too sometimes if I'm walking in the grass and not paying attention. Oh waitaminute -- that wasn't a conclusion sticking to me... it was dog poo. Oh well -- dog poo... your fact-free conclusions... close enough really.

 

[spacefire]

if this were the 60s, my conclusions would be wrong. we're not in the 60s, my conclusions are right. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[quasar2]

see this right here is what we`re up against in further Space development. people need to still "eat". if enough volunteers can be given incentive to make changes, money will eventually come. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spacefire]

think how NASAs budget would help the private space industry if all of it were awarded as a series of prizes modelled after the X-Prize.<br />In ten years we could have a manned mission to Mars<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"if this were the 60s..."</font><br /><br />...you'd be able to point to your flawed logic as being caused by an overapplication of psychedelic substances. As it stands -- the primary candidates are your inability to think and your unwillingness to learn -- as evidenced by your historical posts and your statements in this thread.

 

[lycan359]

30+ space science missions maybe but most of those don't really jive with the VSE which should be NASAs main goal.<br /><br />Move the space science and aeronautics programs to different agencies or make one to house them. I don't support getting rid of them of couse. The biggest thing going to suffer is of course the aeronautics programs. Just think of the successful scramjet flights awhile back, surely there is a followup program planned to do further investigation of such a promising technology... Nope, that was it. The aeronautics based field centers are generally screwed right now.<br />