I am fed up

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

planetling

Guest
In our lifetime:

There will be no manned mission to Mars.

Though it would be nice and I am in full favor, is HLV really necessary to accomplish what we dream to do?

There will be no probes sent to Europa, at least on a serious scale.

There will be no probes sent to Titan, at least on a serious scale.

The 2 Voyagers, as awe-inspiring and incredible as they are, will cease to function in a decade +/- (RTG depletion). There are no plans to send additional craft beyond the interstellar medium, at least utilizing auto thermal or light technology to power on data record units hundreds or thousands of years into the future (just in case we are extinct and by a quark of a chance some other civilization stumbles across it/them).

There will be no Moon base.

There will be no additional space stations, least of all BEO.



My hard-earned tax money keeps going down the crapper (even if only pennies). I would much rather NASA apply for GRANTS across the board, than to have Senate/Congress authorize/cancel projects before allocating out of the fed budget. At least then NASA would have a slightly better chance to spend money a little more wisely.
 
Y

Yuri_Armstrong

Guest
So you support the mentioned projects, but instead of actually doing something aside from wishing them well, you decide to complain and be pessmistic about it instead. That's a great attitude to have.
 
R

rockett

Guest
planetling":1s8x9xve said:
In our lifetime:

There will be no manned mission to Mars.
I dunno, when were you born?
planetling":1s8x9xve said:
Though it would be nice and I am in full favor, is HLV really necessary to accomplish what we dream to do?
Yes. It's the only way to get LARGE projects and modules aloft. Minimum 4X the Shuttle's capacity. I see orbital construction projects and fuel depots as the heart of going beyond BEO.

planetling":1s8x9xve said:
The 2 Voyagers, as awe-inspiring and incredible as they are, will cease to function in a decade +/- (RTG depletion). There are no plans to send additional craft beyond the interstellar medium, at least utilizing auto thermal or light technology to power on data record units hundreds or thousands of years into the future (just in case we are extinct and by a quark of a chance some other civilization stumbles across it/them).
What about the New Horizons mission to Pluto?
http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/

planetling":1s8x9xve said:
There will be no Moon base.
I wouldn't bet on that one. That may change drasticly when another country gets close to doing it. There is also some buzz among the commercial interests.
http://www.googlelunarxprize.org/
planetling":1s8x9xve said:
There will be no additional space stations, least of all BEO.
Not necessarily. More than likely there may eventually be a Lunar and/or Mars station if there is an incentive.
 
G

Gravity_Ray

Guest
planetling":2qj0i7kr said:
In our lifetime:

There will be no manned mission to Mars.

Though it would be nice and I am in full favor, is HLV really necessary to accomplish what we dream to do?

There will be no probes sent to Europa, at least on a serious scale.

There will be no probes sent to Titan, at least on a serious scale.

The 2 Voyagers, as awe-inspiring and incredible as they are, will cease to function in a decade +/- (RTG depletion). There are no plans to send additional craft beyond the interstellar medium, at least utilizing auto thermal or light technology to power on data record units hundreds or thousands of years into the future (just in case we are extinct and by a quark of a chance some other civilization stumbles across it/them).

There will be no Moon base.

There will be no additional space stations, least of all BEO.



My hard-earned tax money keeps going down the crapper (even if only pennies). I would much rather NASA apply for GRANTS across the board, than to have Senate/Congress authorize/cancel projects before allocating out of the fed budget. At least then NASA would have a slightly better chance to spend money a little more wisely.
I have been following the space program and specifically the human space flight for about 4 decades and I feel down from time to time about it as well.

But a few things have changed lately. Specifically Musk and Bigelow, I may be ascribing too much to them, but they have personally taken on the mantle of “change”.

I believe there will be a Moon base and additional BLEO missions (including human missions) within my life and I am probably older than you. So cheer up, that light at the end of the tunnel is not an on-coming train.
 
S

sftommy

Guest
I can appreciate planetling's frustration.

Many of us have waged our enthusiasms into one "great" plan or another, tried to appreciate the merits of each change, each viewpoint and its motivations, listened to the critics pan each proposal of whatever stripe, watched a pscho-thriller of characters mouth their lines across this stage. ad nauseum!

I would be fed up if I didn't think HR 5781 was such a bad bill, we can only afford to be FED-UP when the legislation is signed. Hopefully at that point we'll all be marching together again.

Rep Wolfe suggested this might last well into January...

I will be fed-up by then
 
Y

Yuri_Armstrong

Guest
I can understand frustration with congress, but making ridiculous assumptions that we will never leave LEO again is not going to help the space program.
 
R

rockett

Guest
Yuri_Armstrong":jdyijir4 said:
I can understand frustration with congress, but making ridiculous assumptions that we will never leave LEO again is not going to help the space program.
Actually planetling may have a point. Some SF writers (Larry Niven) have postulated that there is a "tipping point" where a species (like us) reaches a world population threshold where all the available planetary resources are used up in just supporting it's inhabitants. Even other animals rapidly become extinct. At that point it can no longer pursue anything else, and collapses into a non-spacefaring race under it's own weight, which has no hope of ever sustaining any attempts to leave the planet.

Scary, true, but when you look at our current situation, not impossible.
 
P

planetling

Guest
rockett":2yeejn3a said:
I dunno, when were you born?
Early 60's. I should note that I have seen some incredibly remarkable things regarding NASA through the years. But face it, compare todays general pop with that of yesterday. We're lucky if a shuttle launch gets page 6 in the paper.

Yes. It's the only way to get LARGE projects and modules aloft. Minimum 4X the Shuttle's capacity. I see orbital construction projects and fuel depots as the heart of going beyond BEO.
No dispute. But if budgeting is so tight and we have these wonderful dreams to fulfill (in the name of scientific research), again, is it essential to have HLV as opposed to multiple launches with what we already have? All things gravy, I would say work on HLV (not abandon billions in development) while continuing with multiple launches. But all things are not gravy so I still have mixed feelings about this one. Well, mixed feelings about Wash. politics, to be specific.
 
P

planetling

Guest
Gravity_Ray":albaht10 said:
I have been following the space program and specifically the human space flight for about 4 decades and I feel down from time to time about it as well.

But a few things have changed lately. Specifically Musk and Bigelow, I may be ascribing too much to them, but they have personally taken on the mantle of “change”.

I believe there will be a Moon base and additional BLEO missions (including human missions) within my life and I am probably older than you. So cheer up, that light at the end of the tunnel is not an on-coming train.
I hope that you are right, Ray. I know that private industry will have to play some role in this. Even considering the benefits of science and potential employment opportunities, with the current state of the nation the last thing on peoples minds, when they have mouths to feed, is space travel.
 
P

planetling

Guest
sftommy":2h0maqf7 said:
I can appreciate planetling's frustration.

I would be fed up if I didn't think HR 5781 was such a bad bill, we can only afford to be FED-UP when the legislation is signed. Hopefully at that point we'll all be marching together again.

Rep Wolfe suggested this might last well into January...

I will be fed-up by then
The Bills are what bothers me the most. I understand that committees are formed to evaluate projects and then approve or disapprove. But the reality is that politics do in fact influence decisions.

If NASA worked on a multi-billion dollar design (Constellation) what do you think the chances are that they would have cancelled the project themselves? Whether some people believe that it makes sense, or doesn't make sense, NASA engineers were tasked to build something bigger and better than anything before. I doubt very much that they would design and build, with sweat and blood, something some would deam as useless.

This is one of the many reasons that I believe that NASA should not be part of fed budget, the way that it is defined. Grant money, such as what artists use, should be applied for. This way NASA would be much freer to do with the money what they determine makes the most sense. Not politicians or panels put together by politicians.

I'm sure that everything will work out in the end somehow. Maybe I'm so impatient because I'm only getting older and hope to see more wonderful things before my time expires.
 
P

planetling

Guest
Yuri_Armstrong":gwcmqzbw said:
I can understand frustration with congress, but making ridiculous assumptions that we will never leave LEO again is not going to help the space program.
Yuri, please be nice to me ;)

Are you absolutely sure that humans will leave LEO in our lifetime? If you are, please provide definitive proof of this.

There is no doubt that man will travel the solar system. My thoughts pertain to efficient budgeting and setting established goals and time-lines within our govt. space program, and this in the name of pure science. What private industry does as far as "profit machines" may in fact influence human presence in space, but their goal is not out of interest or the persuit of pure science, SETI, etc.
 
Z

zigi_24

Guest
planetling":1b0zxiyt said:
sftommy":1b0zxiyt said:
I can appreciate planetling's frustration.

I would be fed up if I didn't think HR 5781 was such a bad bill, we can only afford to be FED-UP when the legislation is signed. Hopefully at that point we'll all be marching together again.

Rep Wolfe suggested this might last well into January...

I will be fed-up by then
I'm sure that everything will work out in the end somehow. Maybe I'm so impatient because I'm only getting older and hope to see more wonderful things before my time expires.
With most things what you said I agree, but with the last I don't. People in the 60's probably thought "everything will work out in the end" and look what happened in the last 40 years. Nothing will work out if we don't do it ourselves and together. ;)
 
M

menellom

Guest
The greatest danger to space exploration isn't Congressional budget cuts or technological hurdles... it's pessimism and apathy.

I don't want to see the House version of the NASA Authorization Bill passed. You know what I'm doing about it? I've spent the last month calling congressmen, posting fliers, and writing letters. Anything to make even a small impact on the vote.

You want to see NASA reach new heights? Quit whining and do something about it!
 
P

planetling

Guest
menellom":3tmc6o1s said:
The greatest danger to space exploration isn't Congressional budget cuts or technological hurdles... it's pessimism and apathy.

I don't want to see the House version of the NASA Authorization Bill passed. You know what I'm doing about it? I've spent the last month calling congressmen, posting fliers, and writing letters. Anything to make even a small impact on the vote.

You want to see NASA reach new heights? Quit whining and do something about it!
menellom,

While I appreciate your and Yuri_Armstrong comments, I have done what you have claimed to do and a whole lot more over the years, including now. Let us please not insult each other and try to discuss other ways to make a difference. I alone, nor you alone, can never be expected to make radical change unless we as a collective voice our thoughts and be heard. This is a place for ideas. We discuss ideas. I firmly believe that as laws change or become interpretted differently, it is ultimately all of us who force change, when change is required or overdue.

I am against the current climate of politicians (or panels created by politicians) and their role in determining our space explorations fate, especially when it comes down to pure and truthful science. I can scream as loud as I want in front of the White House and contribute my entire pay check, but it will not make a difference. We are a democracy and should be heard as one.

Finally, complaining about my complaints does not make you more intelligent than me, or vise-versa. They are simply my thoughts.
 
C

csmyth3025

Guest
zigi_24":1mk41o5r said:
... People in the 60's probably thought "everything will work out in the end" and look what happened in the last 40 years. Nothing will work out if we don't do it ourselves and together. ;)
I'm one of those "people in the 60's" that thought everything will work out in the end. Well, here we are 50 years later and I can tell you that things are "working out".

Sure, we have problems like the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and global warming, but back then we had wars going in Laos (nobody talks about that) and Vietnam and there were scientists who were seriously warning us about impending global cooling. The fact is that wars and rumors of impending calamity are, sadly, just a part of the human condition. Every generation has its own version.

As far as the space program is concerned, in the 60's the "space program" was mainly the US and the Soviet Union trying to one-up each other. Now we have a real global space industry thanks to NASA, the US military, the ESA, the Russians, the Chinese and even the Japanese. More importantly, we have private sector entrepreneurs who are interested and are being allowed by their governments to engage in commercial space ventures.

There's an old saying that "Rome wasn't built in a day". Our expansion into space may not go as quickly as you or I would like it to, but I can assure you that we've come a long way from where we were "back then".

Chris
 
R

rockett

Guest
planetling":2tk4z477 said:
I am against the current climate of politicians (or panels created by politicians) and their role in determining our space explorations fate, especially when it comes down to pure and truthful science. I can scream as loud as I want in front of the White House and contribute my entire pay check, but it will not make a difference. We are a democracy and should be heard as one.
Soooo, how do we start a lobby and get some backing for it? That's how it's done inside the beltway...
 
C

csmyth3025

Guest
planetling":38cz7e1z said:
...We are a democracy and should be heard as one.
I agree that we are a democracy. I'm not sure how to interpret "should be heard as one". I'm guessing that you think the majority of your fellow citizens agree with your priorities. I suspect that they dont.

Chris
 
P

planetling

Guest
rockett":8o94lvhl said:
Soooo, how do we start a lobby and get some backing for it? That's how it's done inside the beltway...
Well, I would make a lousy politician, or lobbyist, that's for sure :D

But talking about such issues is a start. If enough people read a thread and that stimulates conversation outside of a message board, maybe enough people, in time, would take interest in proposing change. Much like gay, gun or abortion rights activists started years ago? It all starts with an idea. If enough people like the idea that is when we can seriously propose change. Shy of that, it just comes down to one persons opinion, right or wrong, and it goes nowhere.

I guess the first question would be, how does everybody feel about Senate/Congressional/Lobbyist appointed goals and allocation in regard to NASA?

I know that some companies run as for-profit and non-profit simultaneously, so would it make sense to allocate out of the fed budget a specific percentage toward NASA when relating to military needs or requirements, and then having another division within NASA apply for GRANTS to do what they wish? Specific artists have proven their value or contributions in order to apply or reapply for grant money, so would that fit as a model for NASA?

I would be interested in hearing both pros and cons. I certainly have plenty of ideas, but don't have all of the answers!
 
S

sftommy

Guest
The "special interests" that support NASA are so fractured right now I don't think any one lobbyist could represent them. We'd end up with lobbyist competing with lobbyist for the own clients piece of the legislation.

Given the amount of money involved there are probably several lobbyist already working Congress, and perhaps several masquerading as Congress-men(women).

Myself, I faxed 42 members of the House my views over this last weekend
I'm my own best lobbyist ( or worst I can't tell), but at least someone cleaning the fax machines in DC knows I support a fully funded NASA.
 
P

planetling

Guest
sftommy":2g597cxn said:
I'm my own best lobbyist ( or worst I can't tell), but at least someone cleaning the fax machines in DC knows I support a fully funded NASA.
Tommy, that is great, I have done that as well. I might be wrong but I think most on this board "supports" a fully funded NASA. The question then becomes is it right to take my hard-earned tax money, authorize multi-billion dollar projects, only to have it/them canceled?

Also, shouldn't the tax-payer at least be able to recommend to NASA certain ambitions or directions, and then have a NASA appointed panel discuss the legitimacy of those proposed directions without political (W/H) interferance depending on which party wins every 4 years or what corporate lobbyists have in mind?
 
F

flyer456654

Guest
There could always be the non-violent protest for a fully funded Nasa. By that, I mean becoming visible in front of capital hill, tieing up fax machines of congressmen (the infamous black page faxes), email blast them until their email fills up (maximum sized emails), general harassment of their offices with information about a fully funded NASA. HAHA, this would be a funny thing to see on the news. :D
 
R

rockett

Guest
Well, a LOT of how this plays out will be determined in the mid-term elections. Predictions are all over the map on it. So what gets enacted may be determined by new players. Maybe we should ask the challengers where they stand?
 
Y

Yuri_Armstrong

Guest
planetling":489lm56b said:
Yuri_Armstrong":489lm56b said:
I can understand frustration with congress, but making ridiculous assumptions that we will never leave LEO again is not going to help the space program.
Yuri, please be nice to me ;)

Are you absolutely sure that humans will leave LEO in our lifetime? If you are, please provide definitive proof of this.

There is no doubt that man will travel the solar system. My thoughts pertain to efficient budgeting and setting established goals and time-lines within our govt. space program, and this in the name of pure science. What private industry does as far as "profit machines" may in fact influence human presence in space, but their goal is not out of interest or the persuit of pure science, SETI, etc.
It can't be proven either way because it hasn't happened yet. But the way you posted it you seemed absolutely sure of it, and I'm not sure why. We have a global space economy now with many countries participating and newcomers developing their own manned spaceflight programs. LEO will be pretty crowded in about 10 years with the private companies and several space agencies already have their plans to go to the moon as early as 2020. So I can say that it will surely (barring some major catastrophe) happen in my lifetime and probably yours as well.

As menellom said, the greatest threat to space exploration is pessimism and apathy. The two best ways to assist NASA are either to harass the congress to do something, or work for NASA in one of their many departments. I intend to do the latter as soon as I'm qualified, and I know that many here are doing the former. It is every American's duty to support the space program and be optimistic about its future. If we had been as pessimistic as you are after Apollo 1 or during the many rocket failures at the beginning of the space race we would not be where we are today. It took lots of hard work and optimism to make going into space "routine" as it is today. Let's keep that spirit and keep pushing the frontier :D
 
P

planetling

Guest
Yuri_Armstrong":3ut7r0og said:
It can't be proven either way because it hasn't happened yet. But the way you posted it you seemed absolutely sure of it, and I'm not sure why. We have a global space economy now with many countries participating and newcomers developing their own manned spaceflight programs. LEO will be pretty crowded in about 10 years with the private companies and several space agencies already have their plans to go to the moon as early as 2020. So I can say that it will surely (barring some major catastrophe) happen in my lifetime and probably yours as well.

As menellom said, the greatest threat to space exploration is pessimism and apathy. The two best ways to assist NASA are either to harass the congress to do something, or work for NASA in one of their many departments. I intend to do the latter as soon as I'm qualified, and I know that many here are doing the former. It is every American's duty to support the space program and be optimistic about its future. If we had been as pessimistic as you are after Apollo 1 or during the many rocket failures at the beginning of the space race we would not be where we are today. It took lots of hard work and optimism to make going into space "routine" as it is today. Let's keep that spirit and keep pushing the frontier :D

I do not consider myself to be pessimistic. I am, however, a realist. Us older birds have lived long enough to witness the good and the bad (not just concerning NASA), and when bad happens it is time for change, or at least some modification toward improvement. I have stated that I have seen some fantastic things from NASA. Truly incredible things. But I have also seen stagnation, waste of huge sums of money and political side-shows. Without people like me questioning things, and not just about NASA, status quo will eventually hinder progress.

I am in fact excited that private companies are involved with space programs. It is long overdue, imo. I am also excited to see other nations participate and/or lead as well. But the fact remains that NASA can in fact operate better and more efficiently, now and in the future. And whether you and menellom agree or disagree, there are NO specific goals or time lines that have been established or clearly defined in anything that I have read. I have however seen waste of dollars and resources and programs politically skewed. If you plan to work for NASA once you are qualified, maybe you can speak on some of our behalf and attempt these kinds of changes. Because along with a lot of hard work and writing to congress, to act responsibly one must first ask the very hard questions. It is every Americans duty to do so, in order to hopefully move positively forward. :D
 
S

sftommy

Guest
"Also, shouldn't the tax-payer at least be able to recommend to NASA certain ambitions or directions, and then have a NASA appointed panel discuss the legitimacy of those proposed directions without political (W/H) interferance depending on which party wins every 4 years or what corporate lobbyists have in mind?"

This reads like a nice addition to the house bill; having an independent panel assess tax-payer input. NASA leadership would get a report and either fit it into their plans or bury it. Political interference comes from many directions not sure why W/H was singled out as I see as much interence by House and Senate members. Leaving it to the "pros" at NASA seems to be just one brand of political interference this year.

"Well, a LOT of how this plays out will be determined in the mid-term elections. Predictions are all over the map on it. So what gets enacted may be determined by new players. Maybe we should ask the challengers where they stand?"
In Florida it is an issue among voters, Texas it's only an issue if your jobs on the line. The rest of Congress is asking what will you give me and my consitutuents if I vote for your NASA bill. It's how congress works.

NASA will always be political, there's too much money at stake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts