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

spacefire · May 19, 2005

learn what MrMorris? That the future of space exploration was in the 60s? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

shyningnight · May 19, 2005

Here's a little tip for you... In order to reach a CONCLUSION that was not simply pulled out of the nearest convenient biological orifiice, you need some facts. You don't have any. NASA needs some fixing... Disbanding it and starting over is not only not a solution, its the dumbest idea I've heard in years. Paul F.

spacefire · May 19, 2005

actually we should go back to the organizational structure of NACA. NACA was doing great fundamental research, designing improvements for aircraft, operated wind tunnels. But NACA never subcontracted the industry its own aircraft, used for NACAs own purposes. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

lycan359 · May 19, 2005

Paul, Well congratulations in being the first to take this thread down into the ground. Everything was pretty civil until you came and made your insipid comments. I was trying to generate some discussion on the topic with maybe a hint of controversy to liven things up. Dumbest idea you heard in years? Please...

grooble · May 19, 2005

Proof NASA is crap - 1969, man lands on the moon 2005, nothing.

radarredux · May 19, 2005

> Can it be done? Should it be done?/i> I don't think it can be done politically because too many Congresspeople need the votes from the appropriate districts. For example, in next year's budget alone there is over $400 million in pork barrel earmarked for specific districts. However, some major restructing has been discussed from time to time. These include: (1) Moving the science portion out of NASA and giving it to the National Science Foundation (NSF) and leaving NASA to mainly manned space exploration. (2) Shifting most government-developed launch activities to the Department of Defense (DOD). (3) Requiring NASA to use commercial capabilities whenever they are available. For example, if Bigelow is successful in launching a man-tended inflatable station for science, NASA (or the NSF) would give priority to Bigelow over ISS. (4) Like the military, do a "base realignment" for NASA facilities, which means closing some facilities and moving personnel around. (5) Change NASA facilities to Federally Funded Research & Development Centers (FFRDC) (JPL already is one), which generally reduces their guaranteed funding level, makes it easier to hire and fire personnel to more quickly adjust to changing mission needs, and makes it easier for the organizations and individuals to pursue other revenue streams. When ideas such as these have been proposed in the past they have met considerable resistance from NASA employees and the local political leaders. IMHO, NASA's budget is big enough to matter to Congresspeople with NASA activities in their districts but too small to matter to the rest of the US.

nacnud · May 19, 2005

Proof NASA is crap - 1969, man lands on the moon 2005, nothing. Nasa man-days in space 1969, 93 2005, 356 It all depends on the yardstick you use.

quasar2 · May 19, 2005

exactly. it should be kept at that simplicity. offer the cash & award it to those who did it first. MoonReturn prize. first to inspect the old equipment. first Lunar Maglev. first Manned Mission to L1. First Spinning Compartment. First to Mars from somewhre other than Leo. Second lunar FlyBy. First Lunar &/or Mars pedal powered vehicle. First large-Scale OuterSpace Salvage. First Lunar Tunnel. First Mars Tunnel. First to return To Luna from Mars. First Slingshot to &/or from Mars Using Venus & Luna. First OuterSpace casino. First to Cruithne. First Consumption of Space-indigenous water. First Algae tank. First Mobile Parts Hospital in space. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

elguapoguano · May 19, 2005

Ok, here's the real version of that 1969- Man Lands on the Moon 2005- Current NASA Missions -Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) Major mission of the Explorer program. -ACRIMSAT Mission The ACRIMSAT Mission will measure Total Solar Irradiance (TSI), measuring the Sun's energy, during its five-year mission life. -Aura Mission A mission dedicated to the health of Earth's atmosphere. -Cassini-Huygens Mission Unlocking the secrets of Saturn. -Chandra X-ray Observatory Third of NASA's Great Observatories, Chandra will increase our understanding of the Universe. -Cosmic Hot Interstellar Plasma Spectrometer (CHIPS) CHIPS uses an extreme ultraviolet spectrograph to study the "Local Bubble" surrounding our Solar System. -Cluster ESA/NASA Mission The four Cluster spacecraft carry out 3D measurements in the Earth's Magnetosphere. -Deep Impact Exploring Comet Tempel 1 to determine the origins of life in our Solar System. -ISS Expedition 11 Scientific research aboard the International Space Station. -Fast Auroral Snapshot Explorer (FAST) FAST, the second mission in NASA's Small Explorer Satellite Program (SMEX), is a satellite designed to study Earth's aurora. -Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer (FUSE) Mission FUSE looks at light in the far ultraviolet portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. -Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX) Mission Mapping the history of star formation in the Universe. -Genesis Mission The search for origins. -Geotail Mission A mission to study the tail of Earth's magnetosphere. -Gravity Probe B (GPB) Mission Mission to test two unverified predictions of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity. -Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment The twin satellites are making detailed measurements of Earth's gravity field to learn more about gravity and Earth's natural systems. -High Energy Transient Explorer-2 <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Don't let your sig line incite a gay thread ;>) </div>

tap_sa · May 19, 2005

Are these all current NASA missions, or just the S-part. There's the A-part too, A as in aeronautics. Would like to see active programs towards practical airbreathing first stages, hypersonic scramjet etc.

spacefire · May 19, 2005

maybe, then, if NASA is doing so good at scientific missions, we should keep NASA out of the manned space exploration business. They obvioulsy can't get that right: Shuttle, ISS are good examples plus other programs that were cancelled by the government, hurting private industry in the process. I see the CEV going the same route. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

grooble · May 19, 2005

I think it'd be good to create a new agency dedicated to manned space exploration, leaving nasa as a research and robotic / probe agency.

spacefire · May 20, 2005

not a government agency

NASA was created to win the Space Race. It is a product of the cold war and not needed anymore. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

ve7rkt · May 20, 2005

If not NASA, then who? If "private industry," then WHICH private industry, which companies? For-profit deep space telescopes? Universities paying Boeing or LockMart for access to data from New Horizons? What's the return on investment for finding planets around other stars, in terms that shareholders care about? If we think these things are important, but industry won't do them, that's when you need either a government agency or what we call in Canada a "crown corporation," which is a company owned by the government, often operated at a financial loss, to provide a service that is necessary but otherwise wouldn't happen.

radarredux · May 20, 2005

> leaving nasa as a research and robotic / probe agency./i> I would prefer that the science money be sent to the National Science Foundation (for space science) and leave NASA as the manned space exploration organization.

tap_sa · May 20, 2005

"For-profit deep space telescopes? " Yes! "Universities paying Boeing or LockMart for access to data from New Horizons? " Yes! "If we think these things are important, but industry won't do them" Industry will build them if enough universities join forces to cough up the money. Something like this: The story of TPF. Once upon a time there was a professor at University of Texas, Dallas, whose life dream was finding a terrestial extrasolar planet. Great was his frustration for he was very much alone with his ambition, having nothing but decades old eight inch dobson for his vain search. One night returning from the observatory, deep in his thoughts, he wandered into an enchanted forest. Walking by a pond the professor grieved out loud: "Alas that I should live these days when the technology is at hand but the will is not!" A talking frog was swimming in the pond, heard good professor's complaint and replied: "Organize a group of interested parties to raise the money for Terrestial Planet Finder, and contract the private space sector to build it." "Easier said than done, you loquacious amphibian", the professor replied, "my university has none to donate into this effort!". As soon as professor had finished his sentence a giggle erupted nearby and the frog dived away. Bunch of scantly clad gorgeous young ladies appeared and said: "Hey mister, maybe we could help you! We are Dallas Cowgirls and for once we'd like to shake our pom-poms, titties and arses for a greater good than cheering up adult men to run into each other. Tell you what, we'll organize a miss skintight Webb-leotard contests and give all the the profits to your project!" The contest was a monumental success, raising ten million dollars for the TPF project. Professor felt elevated and

mrmorris · May 20, 2005

"...and so TPF got built. The End. " Um. Normally these things start out with: "Once upon a time...' -- then end with '...and everbody lived happily ever after.' There should really be a princess or two involved.. and maybe an enchanted forest or a talking frog. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

grooble · May 20, 2005

Morris, do you think you'll ever go into space?

mrmorris · May 20, 2005

"...think you'll ever go into space?" I believe that I have mentioned on occasion that my job involves gathering process metrics and performining statistical analyses. I tend then to think in statistical terms, but I'm also very much aware of the truth in the saying: "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics" Having said that -- I think the odds are stacked against me going into space during my lifetime. If going into space is to include suborbital flights, I'd say a 1-in-20 chance (largely because the price would have to come ***way*** down from $200K for me to consider forking out cash for 5 minutes of weightlessness). If we're talking orbital or greater, I think the odds are *very* much against it -- more like 1-in-200 (although here I think it might well be available and very tempting -- but outside what I can reasonably afford). Having said that, I have a lot of cautious optimism for the next decade or so. Private industry has the potential to revolutionize spaceflight. You've read my G-X3 thread and are aware of just how impressed I am with the advances in the technologies available and the possibilities they open up for small & capable spacecraft. The launch vehicles and spacecraft are only going to continue to get more and more mass-efficient as technologies advance. However, barring unforseeable revolutionary technology, it's not going to be *easy* or *cheap* to get to orbit for the next few decades at least. I don't consider myself rich enough or 'special' enough to be one of the minority of the population that will get into space until both of those things happen.

spacefire · May 20, 2005

I think you're special Maurice...you deserve a pat on the head and a carrot. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

spacefire · May 20, 2005

Grooble, will you go in space? I think I might. I'm young enough, haven't made my billion yet but I'm thinking about it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

grooble · May 20, 2005

Well i am 22. Depends how my health holds out. I want to make it to 2050, i'll be 68 then. If i started saving a little each week from today and getting my finances in order, then eventually i think i will go into space, at least to orbit, although i'd like to visit the moon. I dreamt of being on mars once. Although as night approached and i could see the stars i got vertigo, and crawled across the martian surface like a worm, afraid to look up into the night sky.

spacefire · May 20, 2005

hey that sounds like an interesting dream. ever though that, if humans descend from martians somehow, that could have been an ancestral memory of the race liberated through your dream? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

tap_sa · May 20, 2005

OK, edited per your requests <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

grooble · May 20, 2005

And Grooble no longer had nightmares about floating off the surface of mars into the terrifying darkness of space...

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

spacefire

Guest

shyningnight

Guest

spacefire

Guest

lycan359

Guest

grooble

Guest

radarredux

Guest

nacnud

Guest

quasar2

Guest

elguapoguano

Guest

tap_sa

Guest

spacefire

Guest

grooble

Guest

spacefire

Guest

ve7rkt

Guest

radarredux

Guest

tap_sa

Guest

mrmorris

Guest

grooble

Guest

mrmorris

Guest

spacefire

Guest

spacefire

Guest

grooble

Guest

spacefire

Guest

tap_sa

Guest

grooble

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page