Disaster In Current Direction For NASA

[dbarden]

Manned spaceflight, for this country, has now ended. This is typical of the Socialist Communist administration in Washington who is more interested in furthering their goals and agenda, rather than doing anything for our nation. Science and technology is our future. New advancements in science makes a better life for all of us. Sadly, there is no longer funding or interest in our future in space by the present people in the White House and Congress. The loss of jobs from this move is enough to make anyone, interested in our future, to be alarmed and angry. I am ashamed that to even admit that I live in a country that is rapidly on the fast track to being a third world country. The Constellation program was seriously flawed from an engineering standpoint and was a bad successor to the shuttle. It is all we had, for a future manned space program. The Ares heavy booster could have been used on a number of future space missions for large payloads in low orbit or beyond. Now, we no longer have the possibility of that coming to reality. The future of science and the exploration in space is now history. Commercial spacecraft will never replace what we had with NASA. There are technological issues and safety issues here. Russia, China and India will take the lead in all areas of science and space. Our future, in America, is dim. Until we can remove the current politicians from the White House and government, we shall all have a dark future.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Moved to proper forum, Space Business and Technology

 

[menellom]

Moved to proper forum, Space Business and Technology

Meteor, can you merge this with the dozen or so identical threads?

 

[clint_dreamer]

Stop being so dramatic. The US is not on its way to becoming a third world country. That is absured. Manned space flight will continue after a short break. Yes the short break sucks, but it is absolutely necessary for safety and monetary reasons.

Don't forget this isn't the first time NASA has experienced a break in manned space flight. The sky didn't fall then and it's not going to now so stop running around saying so.

 

[EarthlingX]

Moved to proper forum, Space Business and Technology

Meteor, can you merge this with the dozen or so identical threads?

Like this one ?

POLL: Is Abandoning NASA's Moon Plan the Right Choice?

 

[Gravity_Ray]

Moved to proper forum, Space Business and Technology

Please!?! The proper forum for this one is Politics... Get the Hazmat suit out.

 

[nimbus]

FUD

Run for your lives!

 

[SpaceTas]

NASA is a political creation and has always been subject to the whims/wishes/interference/direction of politicians: Go to the Moon, stop going to the moon, build a space truck that can do everything, don't use the shuttle for military flights or launching commercial or science payloads, build a space station, o lets help the Russians invite them to help build station, go to Moon and Mars, don't go to Moon or Mars and foster commercial space sector. .....

Recall also NASA had no manned space flight capability while developing the shuttle over about 10 years.

This latest change is just another yank on the leash. NASA will do its best to fulfill is new orders ....

I contend that the this is a great opportunity for NASA to improve its best. Here's a chance to quietly retire it's aging workforce, replace them with new talent, change the working culture where new ideas can be proposed and followed up. consolidate facilities ie close centers (do you need rocket engine testing facilities at Stenis and MSFC when you are contracting out your next rocket?), cut down on bureaucracy (e.g. do you really need 7 signatures to get a non classified computer account and that's after a security check, or 21 signatures to reuse obsoleted furniture) and therefor reduce the number of admin people required, modernize facilities (is MSFC still housing its science section in an 1950-60's ex chemical weapons storage facility?) or can KSC prep a rocket in a week? But all that requires bold action from NASA leadership.

Then the pessimist kicks in ....

 

[sftommy]

Current direction is not a disaster it's a dieing whimper.

"We choose not to put humans in space."

That philosphy is going to drive space technology development?

More likley it's a sop to the middle class while they're weaned off "the space hope" until they stop asking Washington to put any money in it.

Space program development needs to be tied to presidential races, four years from inception to launch.

 

[nimbus]

If nothing else, it's a kick in the pants of every red blooded American that slept on the watch of tax paying contribution to NASA. How did things get to this point? People not caring that NASA was on a shoestring for eternity.

 

[Gravity_Ray]

If nothing else, it's a kick in the pants of every red blooded American that slept on the watch of tax paying contribution to NASA. How did things get to this point? People not caring that NASA was on a shoestring for eternity.

People still don’t care. The hoopla is only on these pages. Ask any 10 random Americans, and 8 will not be able to tell you what NASA stands for, I did that once in a party (by the way one of the 2 that ‘knew’ was my wife and ONLY because I talk about them every day, and she said “North American Space Administration”). However, all new who Kim Kardashian was dating

 

[menellom]

As Ray points out, the bigger problem - the problem which makes the outrage over the new proposal for NASA seem childish and pointless - is public apathy towards science and space.

NASA nor any scientific endeavor will ever get the kind of real support it needs until public interest and knowledge of space and science in general is increased. We can argue over what the right 'path' for NASA is all we want, but the simple truth of the matter is that we only represent about 5-10% of the population - the percent of people who know about and care about the exploration of space.

What we should all be in an outrage over is finding ways to make people be excited about space again!

 

[Mobiusfiftyseven]

This new direction for NASA is exactly what was needed, it points the way for what NASA needs to be in the future. The FAA of Space.

 

[rcsplinters]

As Ray points out, the bigger problem - the problem which makes the outrage over the new proposal for NASA seem childish and pointless - is public apathy towards science and space.

NASA nor any scientific endeavor will ever get the kind of real support it needs until public interest and knowledge of space and science in general is increased. We can argue over what the right 'path' for NASA is all we want, but the simple truth of the matter is that we only represent about 5-10% of the population - the percent of people who know about and care about the exploration of space.

What we should all be in an outrage over is finding ways to make people be excited about space again!

I just have to offer a brief comment on this.

AMEN!

The irony is that its a bit of a chicken and egg problem. The program used to drive interest in science. I remember so vividly watching Armstrong absolutely slack jawed as a 12 year old and believed all the world would eventually be science and math majors. I can honestly say it drove me into the life I have today which has nothing to do with space flight but is technical in any case. Of course, science was the life of the program. Somewhere we got lost. I think from lack of anyone pointing the way.

 

[tanstaafl76]

Over the years NASA has become a self-serving bureaucracy to some degree, and that certainly was apparent from the moment they decided to cancel Shuttle and came up with Constellation as the next step. Constellation was not exciting, not particularly new, and not done on a very ambitious timeline. It over-promised, under-delivered, and became so disconnected from fiscal reality that it became a joke. It was a wasteful idea that accomplished little except keep people busy for a half a decade.

I like the approach for using commercial rockets to get to orbit. What NASA needs to do, if it wants to remain relevant and regain some of its prestige, is to truly break some new ground in the realm of exploration. New propulsion systems, new ideas for human space exploration. Not Apollo 2.0, which is more or less what we were getting with Constellation even if it was successful, which it wouldn't have been.

The recent decision by the Obama administration is realistically the best out of a lot of bad options. NASA currently lacks the vision to justify substantially increasing its budget, and if the decision to cancel Constellation hadn't been made now, I firmly believe it would have eventually been cancelled anyway when the timeline became unmanageable and the fiscal fantasies started unraveling.

 

[menellom]

As Ray points out, the bigger problem - the problem which makes the outrage over the new proposal for NASA seem childish and pointless - is public apathy towards science and space.

NASA nor any scientific endeavor will ever get the kind of real support it needs until public interest and knowledge of space and science in general is increased. We can argue over what the right 'path' for NASA is all we want, but the simple truth of the matter is that we only represent about 5-10% of the population - the percent of people who know about and care about the exploration of space.

What we should all be in an outrage over is finding ways to make people be excited about space again!

I just have to offer a brief comment on this.

AMEN!

The irony is that its a bit of a chicken and egg problem. The program used to drive interest in science. I remember so vividly watching Armstrong absolutely slack jawed as a 12 year old and believed all the world would eventually be science and math majors. I can honestly say it drove me into the life I have today which has nothing to do with space flight but is technical in any case. Of course, science was the life of the program. Somewhere we got lost. I think from lack of anyone pointing the way.

I'm still inspired. I'm considering returning to college to start second baccalaureate degrees in Physics and Mathematics

 

[Gravity_Ray]

Over the years NASA has become a self-serving bureaucracy to some degree, and that certainly was apparent from the moment they decided to cancel Shuttle and came up with Constellation as the next step. Constellation was not exciting, not particularly new, and not done on a very ambitious timeline. It over-promised, under-delivered, and became so disconnected from fiscal reality that it became a joke. It was a wasteful idea that accomplished little except keep people busy for a half a decade.

I like the approach for using commercial rockets to get to orbit. What NASA needs to do, if it wants to remain relevant and regain some of its prestige, is to truly break some new ground in the realm of exploration. New propulsion systems, new ideas for human space exploration. Not Apollo 2.0, which is more or less what we were getting with Constellation even if it was successful, which it wouldn't have been.

The recent decision by the Obama administration is realistically the best out of a lot of bad options. NASA currently lacks the vision to justify substantially increasing its budget, and if the decision to cancel Constellation hadn't been made now, I firmly believe it would have eventually been cancelled anyway when the timeline became unmanageable and the fiscal fantasies started unraveling.

tanstaafl76

It wasn’t NASA that cancelled the Space Shuttle; it was President George W. Bush that cancelled it. The shuttle should have been cancelled due to issues with its TPS and being side mounted on a super cooled tank that shed ice and damaged its tiles, but he cancelled it due to fiscal reasons.

NASA also didn’t come up with Constellation perse; again President George W. Bush announced the return of the United States to the Moon in a bid to bolster public support for his flagging administration. It was basically un-funded by the Bush administration and NASA did what it could with what they had. NASA decided that to do the job with the money they could free up after the shuttle retired, they wouldn’t re-invent the wheel and just go with what could easily be achieved for another boots and flag program.

However, even an Apollo program 2.0 is rather complex and requires broad public and administrative support. However, as time went on, it was obvious that those goals were not going to be met in a timely manner. In the 60’s there was support for spending a lot of money for a program such as Apollo due to the Red Scare, but that didn’t work the same way in the 90’s. Although there is still a threat from Iran and North Korea and their IRBM and ICBM technologies, there isn’t much of a race now to see who is better. Now, public and political pressure for a successful moon landing project isn’t behind a push to go to the moon, which hurt the project in numerous ways, such as budget cuts and apathy. Beyond that the reason for a Moon landing isn’t as clear cut anymore either. Even in the 60’s once humanity reached the moon, public support slowed, and the last three Apollo missions were cancelled, despite the hardware and training that had gone into them. A repeat of Apollo in this century won’t prove anything new either, and would have likely ended the same way.

So the next time we go to the Moon if it isn’t done with a private program with its own agenda’s such as making money from it, I don’t see a public program doing it. Private industry will likely be a better choice for space technology anyway, because it is freed from the constraints of public funding and self serving politicians. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean that NASA will be out of the space business either – several programs that will be brought up will be focusing on robotics and orbital stations, as well as investigating new equipment and technology, which will undoubtedly help create a base for further exploration to the moon and the solar system.

I agree with the rest of your post, but wanted to make sure NASA isn’t held at fault for something they didn’t really have much say about.

 

[menellom]

Essentially what the new proposal does is take the 'divide and conquer' approach to space exploration. The private sector will play the short game, taking over the responsibility of developing low Earth orbit (something I think they're ready for but regardless we'll have to wait and see how things work out), launching en masse and developing a serious infrastructure in orbit. Multiple LVs, commercial stations, by the end of the decade we could see the average number of people in orbit jump from half a dozen to dozens.
Meanwhile, NASA plays the long game, focusing on hardcore research and development into new propulsion, new power, new life support, and eventually a proper HLV and craft designed to take us further out rather than a Saturn v0.5

 

[nec208]

Slow down :lol: :lol: There no way they are not going to moon.The rockets are almost built and China wants to go to the moon in 2015.There no way the US will allow other country to get to moon before them.

The shuttle they have is going to hit retirement and the new rocket they are working on is almost done.

Well Obama was saying alot things just to get support by the conservatives who are saying he is spending too much money on social programs and the stimulus money.It just talk to get support by the conservatives .No way both parties will allow other country to get to the moon before them.

 

[EarthlingX]

Slow down :lol: :lol: There no way they are not going to moon.The rockets are almost built and China wants to go to the moon in 2015.There no way the US will allow other country to get to moon before them.

The shuttle they have is going to hit retirement and the new rocket they are working on is almost done.

Well Obama was saying alot things just to get support by the conservatives who are saying he is spending too much money on social programs and the stimulus money.It just talk to get support by the conservatives .No way both parties will allow other country to get to the moon before them.

Money ? You think they can get even more money for NASA from Congress ? That would be extremely nice, but is it possible ?

NASA could put together alternative HLV in a very reasonable time-frame, if they get money for it, at least that's what i think, or maybe join forces with the USAF .. ?

 

[Cosmicvoid]

I notice the OP has not bothered to make a 2nd post to this thread. Seems like a successful piece of trolling on his/her part.

 

[nec208]

Slow down :lol: :lol: There no way they are not going to moon.The rockets are almost built and China wants to go to the moon in 2015.There no way the US will allow other country to get to moon before them.

The shuttle they have is going to hit retirement and the new rocket they are working on is almost done.

Well Obama was saying alot things just to get support by the conservatives who are saying he is spending too much money on social programs and the stimulus money.It just talk to get support by the conservatives .No way both parties will allow other country to get to the moon before them.

Money ? You think they can get even more money for NASA from Congress ? That would be extremely nice, but is it possible ?

NASA could put together alternative HLV in a very reasonable time-frame, if they get money for it, at least that's what i think, or maybe join forces with the USAF .. ?

=================================================================

Congress and the other 2 parties will not allow cut backs to NASA.

NASA must work with the money they have.To China starts to build a space station or do docking NASA will not get more money.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Mod MW speaking.

Yes, sadly this issue has brought out the hit and run trolls. The discussion has been OK. I am looking at how to best consolidate this mass of squirming worms that SB&T has become.

There will be some thread mergers, I will try and document such in the Moderator Actions topic when I can figure out how to play whack-a-mole like this.

 

[dryson]

People still don’t care. The hoopla is only on these pages. Ask any 10 random Americans, and 8 will not be able to tell you what NASA stands for, I did that once in a party (by the way one of the 2 that ‘knew’ was my wife and ONLY because I talk about them every day, and she said “North American Space Administration”). However, all new who Kim Kardashian was dating

Not to disrespect your wife but that is how that lesser and uneducated are they feel like knowing who some wealthy person is dating makes them feel superior to the person when they talk about them in gossip dens or rumor shacks. Most people on Earth do not want to engage in a meanigful discussion because it would take to much effort and energy to do so. These types of people feel like their have control over these peoples lives by talking about them. Basically for these types of people it is easier to not think then it is too think and logically understand the importance of space exploration.
The other reason why people glamourize and roleplay people like Kardashian is that they want to live that type of lifestyle where they think that if they are as beautiful as the person they are emulating they will receive the same type of status and wealth as the person in question. Who wants to roleplay an astronaught, scientist or engineer, yeah they may make alot of money because of their job which requires work and learning to be intelligent but how does that draw the frat boys and girls to your dorm so you can form your social network just to be the center of attention without really having to do anything? Everyone wants everything now without having to put forth to much effort which only breeds stupid people and not the people that are needed to become a space faring planet. Let the stupid breed and feed them they will multiply like gremlins in the machine of life eating more and breeding twice as fast. Get rid of the glit and glam is a start to curing the planet of this problem, but then capitilsim will die so which is the better style of government?

Socialism or Capitilism - regardless both styles will be populated by idolic worshippers that can be paid alittle or alot to beleive what you want them to beleive or not beleive.

 

[nec208]

People still don’t care. The hoopla is only on these pages. Ask any 10 random Americans, and 8 will not be able to tell you what NASA stands for, I did that once in a party (by the way one of the 2 that ‘knew’ was my wife and ONLY because I talk about them every day, and she said “North American Space Administration”). However, all new who Kim Kardashian was dating

Not to disrespect your wife but that is how that lesser and uneducated are they feel like knowing who some wealthy person is dating makes them feel superior to the person when they talk about them in gossip dens or rumor shacks. Most people on Earth do not want to engage in a meanigful discussion because it would take to much effort and energy to do so. These types of people feel like their have control over these peoples lives by talking about them. Basically for these types of people it is easier to not think then it is too think and logically understand the importance of space exploration.
The other reason why people glamourize and roleplay people like Kardashian is that they want to live that type of lifestyle where they think that if they are as beautiful as the person they are emulating they will receive the same type of status and wealth as the person in question. Who wants to roleplay an astronaught, scientist or engineer, yeah they may make alot of money because of their job which requires work and learning to be intelligent but how does that draw the frat boys and girls to your dorm so you can form your social network just to be the center of attention without really having to do anything? Everyone wants everything now without having to put forth to much effort which only breeds stupid people and not the people that are needed to become a space faring planet. Let the stupid breed and feed them they will multiply like gremlins in the machine of life eating more and breeding twice as fast. Get rid of the glit and glam is a start to curing the planet of this problem, but then capitilsim will die so which is the better style of government?

Socialism or Capitilism - regardless both styles will be populated by idolic worshippers that can be paid alittle or alot to beleive what you want them to beleive or not beleive.

People are just not into space or space rockets at all anymore.Before it was like wow look at my cool space ship we are going in space not anymore .Wow look at the space shuttle ,space station we want a moon base.We are going make better space ship than what we have.Now people are not interest in space or space rockets .Just look at star trek ,stargate Sg1 ,stargate atlantis it is dieing .Yes 99 % of the stuff on TV or in the movies are not space scfi .Even the space scfi- Tv shows and movies we do have that makes up less than 1% are dieing .