Maintaining the International Space Station is often cited as a drag on Nasa resources and a hindrance to developing Ares or another launch system. I want to know how much it is costing Nasa to maintain it. It is also my understanding that this station is "international" which would mean that the costs of maintaining it would be shared. The Station is almost completely contructed which leads me to wonder why maintaining it is going to be such a burden. We will launch supply's ...Russia, ESA, JAXA will launch supply's too. Are we paying for all of the supply's? Are we paying the other nations to launch supply's? How much will we spend to maintain the station for one year? :?: :!:
- Status
The USA does the majority of the spending on the station. The Space Shuttle does "ALL" the heavy lifting to orbit of the stations important(heavy) parts!....ALL....I believe we need to fund the station at all costs myself.....Only because it is the ONLY station.....PERIOD...If we abandon the station to others...it will only fall into maybe Russias hands.(Thank god China is not involved in the I.S.S.)
We wouldn't need the I.S.S. if it wasn't the only station....BUT IT IS THE ONLY SPACE STATION IN ORBIT!
We need to keep involved with the station until we have our own exclusive station.....PERIOD!
I believe we are paying nearly 80%? Am I right?
If you want to stay top dog in space you gotta carry the weight!
It is a small price to pay in the long run......But, we should have been making our own station connected to the I.S.S. and when ready seperated and had our own long ago....
Woulda, coulda, shoulda,......hindsights a *****....(lol)
Actually, once we have completed the station it will be easier on us(not much!) We will not have the shuttle, so everyone will have to pitch in more......(lol) Lazy ass basterds......
We wouldn't need the I.S.S. if it wasn't the only station....BUT IT IS THE ONLY SPACE STATION IN ORBIT!
We need to keep involved with the station until we have our own exclusive station.....PERIOD!
I believe we are paying nearly 80%? Am I right?
If you want to stay top dog in space you gotta carry the weight!
It is a small price to pay in the long run......But, we should have been making our own station connected to the I.S.S. and when ready seperated and had our own long ago....
Woulda, coulda, shoulda,......hindsights a *****....(lol)
Actually, once we have completed the station it will be easier on us(not much!) We will not have the shuttle, so everyone will have to pitch in more......(lol) Lazy ass basterds......
We need to keep involved with the station until we have our own exclusive station.....PERIOD!
We don’t need any space station PERIOD!
What has the American public gained from the ISS?
Those make work experiments are of dubious value at best.
We grew some crystals! Oh boy lets break out the champagne!
Experience building things in space! 100 billion dollars worth, I think not.
Experience living in space! Yea we spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year to shoot food, O2 and nappies up there. How many years does it take to figure out “It’s gonna cost hundreds of millions each year!”?
We don’t need no stinkin space station!
We don’t need any space station PERIOD!
What has the American public gained from the ISS?
Those make work experiments are of dubious value at best.
We grew some crystals! Oh boy lets break out the champagne!
Experience building things in space! 100 billion dollars worth, I think not.
Experience living in space! Yea we spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year to shoot food, O2 and nappies up there. How many years does it take to figure out “It’s gonna cost hundreds of millions each year!”?
We don’t need no stinkin space station!
Primitive Earth humankind is a drain on our space resources. We need to externalize a demi-national economy for a joint international space advancement pool with blank cheques for space manpower and resources to build ships and colonies, and whatever else. Why should space agency and group monies be taken from national economies and private investment? The thing's only going to move ahead if humanity can give it what it needs - $$$.
Otherwise, we'll stagnantly flounder about for another forty years, hoping for space colonization.
Space advancement needs revolutionary thinking in a socio-economic context.
Our politicians are foolish failures, for the most part. They're hopelessly crosswired. Some "kinda almost" seem to know what's going on, in a real-time context, not a human concoction context.
All the difference in the world...or out.
Anyways, the ISS is super important. I consider the colonization of Earth orbit and the Moon a couple of the most important issues of our time. A manned Mission to Mars is a bit of an extravagance, but we all want to do it, don't we? Well, mostly. Inspiration they say. I will go for that.
Otherwise, we'll stagnantly flounder about for another forty years, hoping for space colonization.
Space advancement needs revolutionary thinking in a socio-economic context.
Our politicians are foolish failures, for the most part. They're hopelessly crosswired. Some "kinda almost" seem to know what's going on, in a real-time context, not a human concoction context.
All the difference in the world...or out.
Anyways, the ISS is super important. I consider the colonization of Earth orbit and the Moon a couple of the most important issues of our time. A manned Mission to Mars is a bit of an extravagance, but we all want to do it, don't we? Well, mostly. Inspiration they say. I will go for that.
Huh? What does that mean?
Blank cheque? There will be 83million new baby boomers retiring in the next 20 years. That is 27% of the current population. That’s NOT counting the existing retirees. They are going to want their social security checks. There are millions more that need health care changes that is sure to cost the US upwards of a trillion(s). I don’t see any money coming from space anytime soon. So investment in space is going to be in very short supply in the coming years. We are at the beginning of a downturn in space investment. It won’t be a year or two either, I expect at least a decade or more.
Most of us feel the same way. But still they do pretty much what we tell them to do.
The funny thing is I don’t hear anything on the world news at night about needing to build space societies or bases on other celestial bodies.
The ISS needs to stay in orbit as there are a lot of technologies that are being developed within aerospace industry that require its existence.
One example is Great Britain is working on a project to build and launch possible future additions for space stations on the ground and have them connect by themselves via remote. Basically paving the way for countries to build many sections at the same time and send them up in orbit in a determined order to mass assemble another station.
As far as the space shuttle debate, Russia has already agreed to "foot the ride" on top of their rockets.
China is getting ready to sign on and start sending up astronauts as well to the ISS.
The United States is already engaged with other countries to co-deal cost and maintenance for the space station
The ISS is pretty much complete and now to trash the project would be completely foolish.
One example is Great Britain is working on a project to build and launch possible future additions for space stations on the ground and have them connect by themselves via remote. Basically paving the way for countries to build many sections at the same time and send them up in orbit in a determined order to mass assemble another station.
As far as the space shuttle debate, Russia has already agreed to "foot the ride" on top of their rockets.
China is getting ready to sign on and start sending up astronauts as well to the ISS.
The United States is already engaged with other countries to co-deal cost and maintenance for the space station
The ISS is pretty much complete and now to trash the project would be completely foolish.
At some point in this century we are eventually going to go to Mars, if we don't utterly abandon the notion of progress altogether. Going to Mars will involve long-term space travel, in-space construction and repair, long-term maintenance of a spacecraft, dealing with food, water, and waste issues, space medicine, etc, etc. Do we really want to be learning these skills on the far end of a multimillion mile trip to Mars or an asteroid? The real value of the ISS is not in how many crystals it can grow, but in the building and maintaining of the station itself. Here's hoping that there are more people who realize that and fewer intellectually nearsighted individuals who can't see any value in it because they refuse to look.
As to the question at hand, now that we've learned much of the valuable lessons of its construction, let's begin sharing more of the daily operations with our international partners while we focus on exploration beyond LEO. If it's true we've done 80% of the work till now, then there's a great deal of that 80% we could farm out to others and still stay significantly involved. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition. If NASA scaled back to say, 40% participation, and turned half of that over to private interests, that frees up a lot of resources for the Moon and Mars and still leaves us the major player at the ISS.
As to the question at hand, now that we've learned much of the valuable lessons of its construction, let's begin sharing more of the daily operations with our international partners while we focus on exploration beyond LEO. If it's true we've done 80% of the work till now, then there's a great deal of that 80% we could farm out to others and still stay significantly involved. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition. If NASA scaled back to say, 40% participation, and turned half of that over to private interests, that frees up a lot of resources for the Moon and Mars and still leaves us the major player at the ISS.
Well to get back to the original question. Launching shuttles is what makes the ISS so costly to the US. After shuttle retirement costs will come down big time. NASA is paying Russia to continue launching crews. But that is something in the order of the price tag for about 1 or 2 shuttle launches for the period from 2011 to 2015.!! The US doesn't have to pay much for the shipment of supplies. This is mostly handled through Progress, ATV and HTV free of charge. Example: The shuttle has launched the European and Japanese lab modules and other station hardware. In return the partners will launch supplies for the US.
The US has of course to pay for ground infrastructure, lab experiments and possibly, cargo shipments under the COTS agreement with private sector companies. Compared to the overall price tag of the American contribution to the station, these costs are negligible.
The US has of course to pay for ground infrastructure, lab experiments and possibly, cargo shipments under the COTS agreement with private sector companies. Compared to the overall price tag of the American contribution to the station, these costs are negligible.
Well, it's quite """easy""" to solve the budget issues of US and at the same time NASA's "little problem" .
RAISE THE DAMN TAXES with a couple of percent!
*ducking for incoming stones*
RAISE THE DAMN TAXES with a couple of percent!
*ducking for incoming stones*
JJD --
That's an excellent question, but one that's probably impossible to answer.
You mention "maintenance", so I assume your question differentiates between the sunk original costs of design, development and construction and other costs such as transportation and operation. Some of the costs of transportation were arranged through barter agreements for DD&C for certain modules and other equipment.
But if we simplify this question to focus only operational (or maintenance) costs, one could look at the line item in NASA's budget for the International Space Station for those years after the last space shuttle assembly flight has been completed and get some idea of the cost.
However, there are problems with even doing this. We do not know how much this cost reflects NASA's rebate of cost paid on NASA's behalf for certain things. In addition, NASA's budget reflects American costs of operations. These would be different in different countries. But another way to look at this is in terms of crew allocation.
That's an excellent question, but one that's probably impossible to answer.
You mention "maintenance", so I assume your question differentiates between the sunk original costs of design, development and construction and other costs such as transportation and operation. Some of the costs of transportation were arranged through barter agreements for DD&C for certain modules and other equipment.
But if we simplify this question to focus only operational (or maintenance) costs, one could look at the line item in NASA's budget for the International Space Station for those years after the last space shuttle assembly flight has been completed and get some idea of the cost.
However, there are problems with even doing this. We do not know how much this cost reflects NASA's rebate of cost paid on NASA's behalf for certain things. In addition, NASA's budget reflects American costs of operations. These would be different in different countries. But another way to look at this is in terms of crew allocation.
By examining crew allocation of the ISS, we get another answer that is perhaps the best we can use. The ISS Partnership agreement allocates the six-person crew equally to Roscosmos and NASA. In other words, each is given three crew slots. However, within NASA's share, a small portion is assigned to its former Space Station Freedom partners -- ESA, JAXA and CSA.
For ESA, this share (before including the separate arrangement between the Italian Space Agency and NASA) was one six-month flight every other year. So, doing the math, this means that ESA's share of NASA's 50% of ISS crew assignments was 1/12th (3 USOS crew for four six-month segments equals 12) or about 8.3%. I'm not sure what the shares for JAXA or CSA are. And it is possible that including ANSI's (the Italian Space Agency's) share within NASA will raise ESA's share.
At any rate, this arrangement would imply that Roscosmos should be responsible for 50% of the operational cost of the ISS (unless the sell shares, which they have been doing). NASA would cover something less than 50%, probably less than 40%. And the other partners have the remaining share. ESA has expressed interest in increasing their share. Time will tell whether other partners share ESA's enthusiasm.
For ESA, this share (before including the separate arrangement between the Italian Space Agency and NASA) was one six-month flight every other year. So, doing the math, this means that ESA's share of NASA's 50% of ISS crew assignments was 1/12th (3 USOS crew for four six-month segments equals 12) or about 8.3%. I'm not sure what the shares for JAXA or CSA are. And it is possible that including ANSI's (the Italian Space Agency's) share within NASA will raise ESA's share.
At any rate, this arrangement would imply that Roscosmos should be responsible for 50% of the operational cost of the ISS (unless the sell shares, which they have been doing). NASA would cover something less than 50%, probably less than 40%. And the other partners have the remaining share. ESA has expressed interest in increasing their share. Time will tell whether other partners share ESA's enthusiasm.
Samkent - Way wrong. We need ISS in the worst way. We develop new and useful technologies by buiding, maintaining and seeing how the station and it's components age. We learn how to adapt to space and long duration travel on the space station. If there is to be a future in space (we have to go or the race will eventually die), we will use all of the technologies we have learned and invented from the ISS.
You don't seem to understand that technology and science comes from space as well as the exploration of space. If you quit space, the leading minds of the U.S. will go elsewhere to practice their trades and others will benefit from it while we become a third world nation. Not a pretty thought.
We do need a stinkin space station and we do need to lead in space and science technology. It is a small mind that stay on the planet and doesn't venture out. It's a mind that will watch as others leave and the planet dies.
You don't seem to understand that technology and science comes from space as well as the exploration of space. If you quit space, the leading minds of the U.S. will go elsewhere to practice their trades and others will benefit from it while we become a third world nation. Not a pretty thought.
We do need a stinkin space station and we do need to lead in space and science technology. It is a small mind that stay on the planet and doesn't venture out. It's a mind that will watch as others leave and the planet dies.
I'll let Wayne speak for me
Its your choice,really.
Posted on Jun 16, 2009 12:24:59 AM | Wayne Hale
This is a little talk I put together to give at various functions. I learned all this in college world history class. Pardon the all caps - it is written as a speech and my old eyes need large font to read it.
But the point is as important as it can be. We stand on the brink of ceding American leadership in exploration to other nations of the world. We need to think about the consequences of this action.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IN MY NEW ROLE I GET TO TRAVEL AROUND THE COUNTRY AND TALK TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. THESE DAYS I AM FREQUENTLY ASKED THE SAME QUESTION: CAN WE AFFORD THE LUXURY OF HAVING A SPACE PROGRAM. IN THESE DAYS WHERE THE NATION IS FIGHTING TWO WARS, THERE IS A CRISIS IN HEALTH CARE, THE NATIONAL DEBT IS REACHING ASTRONOMICAL LEVELS, AND WE ARE IN AN ECONOMIC RECESSION, INDEED FIGHTING HARD TO PREVENT ANOTHER GREAT DEPRESSION, CAN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AFFORD A SPACE PROGRAM.
IT DOES LITTLE TO POINT OUT THAT NASA RECEIVES 0.6% OF THE FEDERAL BUDGET AND IF ALL SPACE ACTIVITIES WERE TERMINATED THAT DROP IN THE FEDERAL BUCKET WOULD NOT SOLVE ANY OF THE PROBLEMS FACING THE NATION.
I BELIEVE THAT A STRONG BUSINESS CASE CAN BE MADE THAT THE SPACE PROGRAM LEADS TO ECONOMIC GROWTH THROUGH THE INVENTION OF NEW PRODUCTS WHICH STIMULATE NEW BUSINESSES AND INDEED WHOLE NEW INDUSTRIES. BUT I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT CASE TODAY, INDEED I BELIEVE YOU ARE MORE FAMILIAR WITH IT THAN I AM.
A CASE CAN BE MADE THAT SPACE EXPLORATION EXCITES OUR YOUNG PEOPLE TO STUDY SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, ENGINEERING – AREAS WHICH THE NATION IS DESPERATELY SHORT OF NEW COLLEGE GRADUATES. BUT I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT CASE TODAY.
A CASE CAN BE MADE THAT BY LOOKING BACK ON THE EARTH AND STUDYING OTHER PLANETS WE CAN BEST UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR CLIMATE AND PERHAPS HOW TO CONTROL IT. BUT I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT CASE TODAY.
THERE IS AN EVEN STRONGER CASE THAT SPACE ACTIVITIES HELP PROTECT OUR NATION MILITARILY; BUT I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT CASE TODAY.
I AM HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THE LONG TERM CONSEQUENCES OF SPACE EXPLORATION, OR OF NOT HAVING SPACE EXPLORATION.
I AM MINDFUL TODAY THAT WE CHOSE OUR OWN DESTINY. WE ARE FOUNDED BY PIONEERS WHO SAW OPPORTUNITY AND WHO HAD THE COURAGE AND ENERGY TO TAKE A CHANCE.
HISTORY TELLS US THAT THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES. IT IS NOT A GIVEN THAT THE UNITED STATES WILL ALWAYS BE GREAT. TODAY WE ARE THE WORLD’S ONLY SUPER POWER AND WHAT WE DO IN SPACE CONTRIBUTES TO THAT POSITION. WITHOUT CONTINUED COURAGE AND SWEAT, WE COULD FIND OURSELVES NO LONGER THE LEADER OF THE WORLD.
EVERYONE KNOWS THE QUOTATION FROM THE HISTORIAN GEORGE SANTAYANA: “THOSE WHO DO NOT LEARN FROM THE PAST ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT”. AND SO, TODAY, I HAVE A LITTLE HISTORY LESSON FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT IN THE DAYS TO COME.
FIVE HUNDRED YEARS AGO THERE WAS ONLY ONE SUPERPOWER IN THE WORLD: CHINA.
THE MING EMPIRE RULED A PEOPLE MORE NUMEROUS THAN THE ANCIENT ROMAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT, LARGER IN TERRITORY THAN MODERN RUSSIA, VASTLY MORE POWERFUL AND RICHER THAN ALL THE PETTY FIEFDOMS OF CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN EUROPE PUT TOGETHER.
THE MING EMPIRE WAS FABULOUSLY WEALTHY. THE EMPEROR WANTED A NEW CAPITOL: THEY BUILT THE CITY WE KNOW AS BEJING FROM EMPTY GRAZING LAND.
THE EMPEROR NEEDED TO FEED THE PEOPLE IN HIS NEW CITY: THEY BUILD THE GRAND CANAL, AN ENGINEERING FEAT NOT RIVALED UNTIL THE SUEZ AND PANAMA CANALS.
THE EMPEROR WANTED A NAVY, SO HE APPOINTED AN ADMIRAL TO BUILD A FLEET OF 1,500 SHIPS.
THE LARGEST OF THESE SHIPS RIVAL THE SIZE OF WWII’S SUPPORT AIRCRAFT CARRIERS; THEY WERE THE LARGEST WOODEN SHIPS EVER BUILT, THE LARGEST SAILING SHIPS EVER BUILT.
IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE AGE OF STEAM AND STEEL FOUR HUNDRED YEARS LATER THAT LARGER SHIPS BUILT. THERE WERE OVER 30,000 SAILORS IN THIS NAVY. CHINA WAS SO INCONCEIVABLY RICH IN THOSE DAYS THAT THE COST OF THIS VAST NAVY WAS AN INCONSEQUENTIAL FRACTION OF THE RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE EMPEROR.
THE CHINESE ADMIRALS SET OUT ON MANY VOYAGES OF DISCOVERY AND COMMERCE TO THE PHILIPPINES, MALAYSIA, INDIA, AND AS FAR AS THE EAST COAST OF AFRICA. FOR OVER 40 YEARS THE MING NAVY MADE MANY VOYAGES WHICH RESULTED IN CHINESE HEGEMONY: TOTAL POLITICAL CONTROL OVER HALF THE WORLD. NOT HALF THE “KNOWN WORLD” AS THOSE IGNORANT EUROPEANS MIGHT GUESS, BUT HALF THE TOTAL WORLD.
FROM THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE THROUGH INDIA TO THE BERING STRAIT, FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND TO THE WEST COAST OF THE AMERICAS, TRADE AND TRIBUTE POURED INTO CHINA. ALL OF THESE ACCOMPLISHMENTS ARE WELL DOCUMENTED AND WELL KNOWN TO HISTORIANS.
IN A RECENT BOOK, A RETIRED BRITISH ROYAL NAVY SEA CAPTAIN, GAVIN MENZIES, PROVIDES EVIDENCE THAT THE CHINESE NAVY CIRCUMNAVIGATED THE WORLD IN 1421, DISCOVERING ANTARCTICA IN THE SOUTH AND COMING WITHIN TWO HUNDRED MILES OF THE NORTH POLE IN THE OTHER DIRECTION.
CAPTAIN MENZIES HAS EVIDENCE THAT THE CHINESE SET UP COLONIES NOT JUST ON THE ORIENT FACING EAST COAST OF AFRICA, BUT ON THE WEST COAST AS WELL, CHINESE COLONIES IN THE CARIBBEAN, NEAR PRESENT DAY PROVIDENCE RHODE ISLAND, AND ON GREENLAND. WOW.
HOW DID THE EUROPEANS GET AN ACCURATE MAP OF THE WORLD 75 YEARS BEFORE COLUMBUS AND A CENTURY BEFORE MAGELLAN? FROM CHINA!
SO THE CHINESE WERE THE WORLDS GREATEST SUPERPOWER AND CONTROLLED HALF THE WORLD AND EXPLORED THE ENTIRE GLOBE
IN 1415, THE TINY PRINCIPALITY OF PORTUGAL PUT EVERYTHING ON THE LINE. PORTUGAL WAS INSOLVENT, ITS PRINCE IN DEBT AND HIS COURT THREADBARE. AFTER A HUGE DEBATE, THE PORTUGUESE BORROWED JUST ENOUGH MONEY TO FINANCE A FEW SHIPS AND THEIR CREWS.
WITH LESS THAN TWO DOZEN SHIPS - NONE OF THEM LARGE BY EVEN THE MISERABLE EUROPEAN STANDARD OF THE DAY – THE PORTUGUESE FOUGHT A SUCCESSFUL SEA BATTLE IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND CAPTURED THE PORT OF CEUTA ON THE NORTH AFRICAN COAST. THIS OPENED UP, EVER SO SLIGHTLY, TRADE WITH THE ORIENT, ESPECIALLY INCREASED TRADE IN THE HIGHLY DESIRED SPICES FROM THAT REGION.
THE SCRAPPY PORTUGUESE DECIDED TO GO FORWARD, LEARNING THE LESSON THAT TAKING RISKS WAS WORTHWHILE, AND LOSSES COULD BE ACCEPTED. THEY INVENTED A NEW TYPE OF SHIP SUITED FOR THE STORMY ATLANTIC, THE CARAVEL, THE FIRST REALLY NEW SHIP DESIGN SINCE ANCIENT TIMES.
THE CARAVEL BECAME ONLY THE FIRST IN A SERIES OF CONTINUALLY IMPROVING AND INNOVATIVE SHIP DESIGNS THAT HAVE CONTINUED EVEN TO THE PRESENT.
THE PORTUGUESE EARNED THE ADMIRATION AND ENVY OF ALL THE EUROPEAN STATES, AND EVERY COUNTRY TRIED TO EMULATE THEM.
THUS STARTED THE AGE OF WOODEN SHIPS AND IRON MEN.
OVER THE NEXT CENTURIES, THE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES REPEATEDLY DECIDED TO GO FORWARD, BY FITS AND BY STARTS, FOR GOOD REASONS AND FOR BAD ONES, ALWAYS WITH ENDLESS DEBATE, GENERALLY TEETERING ON THE EDGE OF FINANCIAL INSOLVENCY. BUT THE WEST EUROPEANS MADE THE DECISION TO GO FORWARD INTO THE WORLD FOR TRADE, TREASURE, DISCOVERY, AND GLORY. THEY IMMERSED THE WEST IN NEW IDEAS, NEW TECHNOLOGIES, AND NEW INNOVATIONS.
BACK IN CHINA, AFTER A GENERATION OF ASTOUNDING VOYAGES, THE GREAT MING ADMIRAL DIED AT SEA. THE EMPEROR ALSO DIED, AND THE NEW EMPEROR CAME UNDER DIFFERENT INFLUENCES.
THESE VOICES COUNSELED THE YOUNG EMPEROR TO TURN INWARD. SURELY CHINA HAD ENOUGH PROBLEMS TO SOLVE IN CHINA, WHY WASTE TIME AND ENERGY EXPLORING? THESE ADVISORS TOLD THE EMPEROR THAT THERE WAS NOTHING IN THE WORLD TO MATCH CHINESE CULTURE - TRUE. THEY TOLD THE EMPEROR THERE WERE NO GOODS IN THE WORLD TO RIVAL CHINESE GOODS - TRUE. IN SHORT, THEY CONCLUDED, THERE WAS NOTHING OUT THERE FOR CHINA – A CONCLUSION THAT SOUNDED LOGICAL BUT WAS FAR FROM TRUE.
THEY ADVISED THAT CHINA SHOULD PROTECT WHAT THEY HAD FROM THE FOREIGNERS. FOREIGNERS WHO WANTED WHAT THE CHINESE HAD. THE EMPEROR FOLLOWED THIS ADVICE. HE COMPLETED THE GREAT WALL TO KEEP FOREIGNERS OUT. HE BUILT A NEW CAPITAL, A “FORBIDDEN CITY” TO KEEP THE CITIZENS OF HIS OWN COUNTRY OUT.
THE EMPEROR ORDERED THAT THE FLEET BE BURNED. THE SAILORS WERE DISBANDED. IT BECAME A CAPITAL OFFENSE TO BUILD A SAILING SHIP WITH MORE THAN TWO MASTS. THE EMPEROR EVEN ORDERED THAT ALL THE RECORDS OF ALL THE VOYAGES BE BURNED. CHINA TURNED INWARD.
WHEN THE PORTUGUESE EXPLORERS BERNARDO DIAS AND VASCO DE GAMA ROUNDED THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE FROM THE WEST TO THE EAST, THEY FOUND LEGENDS OF WHITE GHOST SHIPS THAT HAD COME TWO GENERATIONS EARLIER. AFRICANS ALL ALONG THE EAST COAST WERE WEARING CHINESE STYLE HATS AND CLOTHES.
WHEN MAGELLAN CROSSED THE PACIFIC OCEAN AND CLAIMED THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS FOR KING CHARLES OF SPAIN HE FOUND SILK AND PORCELAIN, ALL IMPORTED FROM CHINA YEARS BEFORE, BUT THE TRADERS THAT BROUGHT THEM HAD VANISHED.
ALL THROUGHOUT THE INDIES, EUROPEANS FOUND REMNANTS OF A CULTURE THAT HAD BEEN OF GREAT INFLUENCE BUT WHICH HAD DISAPPEARED COMPLETELY FROM THE SCENE: CHINESE CULTURE.
THE CHINESE COURSE LED INEXORABLY TO STAGNATION, THEN DISSOLUTION, THEN DECAY, AND FINALLY TO DESTRUCTION. FOR THERE CAME A DAY WHEN THE PORTUGUESE AND THE OTHER EUROPEANS CARVED UP THE PITIFULLY WEAK REMNANTS OF CHINA FOR THEIR OWN COLONIAL USE.
FIVE HUNDRED YEARS LATER, THE GREAT 20TH CHINESE HISTORIAN WEI PU CONCLUDED THE CHOICE OF DIRECTION WAS CRITICAL. THE CHINESE TURNED INWARD, THE EUROPEANS WENT FORWARD. THAT CHINESE HISTORIAN OBSERVED: “THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD FOR THE LAST 500 YEARS HAS BEEN THE HISTORY OF THE WEST.”
CHOICES MATTER. THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES, SOME UNSEEN AT THE TIME. BUT ONE CONSTANT HAS HELD THROUGH HUMAN HISTORY; TAKING RISKS TO FIND NEW KNOWLEDGE, NEW LANDS, AND NEW WAYS OF DOING THINGS, NEW CULTURES, AND NEW IDEAS HAS ALWAYS PAID OFF. STAYING HOME IS THE SHORT ROAD TO FAILURE.
SO ARE WE, TODAY, TO BE THE CHINESE OR THE PORTUGUESE? WHICH DIRECTION WILL OUR COUNTRY CHOOSE? THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES, ONLY REWARDS FOR THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO SEIZE OPPORTUNITY, TAKE RISKS, WORK HARD, AND SHOW COURAGE.
THE CHINESE HAVE LEARNED THIS LESSON FROM HISTORY. WILL WE?
Carrying the Torch
Posted on Jul 19, 2009 04:04:50 PM | Wayne Hale
I've said before that the exploration of space reminds me of the Olympic torch relay. So here is a note to all you relay runners who carry the torch every day in your work; to those who have retired from the race, and to those who dream of carrying the fire one day.
Not everybody gets to carry the torch up the stadium steps and light the cauldron in the presence of tens of thousands and the virtual presence of tens of millions. Only a very few get to carry the torch in moments of glory.
Not everyone who carries the torch is remembered, only a few names are ever announced.
Not everybody gets to carry the torch over the mountain tops, just a handful get to carry the fire through magnificent vistas.
Not everybody gets to carry the torch where it is cheered on by adoring crowds.
Somebody has to carry the torch in the rain, somebody has to carry the torch through the valley, somebody has to carry the torch through the warehouse district and the swamp. Somebody even has to carry the torch in places where the onlookers jeer.
But the the torch has to be carried. If the flame is ever to reach its goal, if the cheering multitudes are ever to see the final runner holding the torch high, it must to be carried.
Space exploration is like that. Some days are glorious days, some days are awful, and most days can be tedious.
But if we stumble, and the torch falls, and the light goes out, then all the dreams and all the sweat of all of those who came before us will be for nought. And all the hopes for those who might have carried the torch after us will fade away in the night.
We don't get to chose the section of the course we run. We just get to carry the torch.
Celebrate with those who carried the torch in glory days. Know that glory days will come again.
Don't forget to hold it high, even in ordinary times, even in the presence of those who jeer.
Because those who carry the torch, carry the future in their hands.
Because even if you have to run through the desert and never hear the cheering throngs, you are still carrying the fire.
And how well you run your distance is the only reward that is truly worth having.
Its your choice,really.
Posted on Jun 16, 2009 12:24:59 AM | Wayne Hale
This is a little talk I put together to give at various functions. I learned all this in college world history class. Pardon the all caps - it is written as a speech and my old eyes need large font to read it.
But the point is as important as it can be. We stand on the brink of ceding American leadership in exploration to other nations of the world. We need to think about the consequences of this action.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IN MY NEW ROLE I GET TO TRAVEL AROUND THE COUNTRY AND TALK TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. THESE DAYS I AM FREQUENTLY ASKED THE SAME QUESTION: CAN WE AFFORD THE LUXURY OF HAVING A SPACE PROGRAM. IN THESE DAYS WHERE THE NATION IS FIGHTING TWO WARS, THERE IS A CRISIS IN HEALTH CARE, THE NATIONAL DEBT IS REACHING ASTRONOMICAL LEVELS, AND WE ARE IN AN ECONOMIC RECESSION, INDEED FIGHTING HARD TO PREVENT ANOTHER GREAT DEPRESSION, CAN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AFFORD A SPACE PROGRAM.
IT DOES LITTLE TO POINT OUT THAT NASA RECEIVES 0.6% OF THE FEDERAL BUDGET AND IF ALL SPACE ACTIVITIES WERE TERMINATED THAT DROP IN THE FEDERAL BUCKET WOULD NOT SOLVE ANY OF THE PROBLEMS FACING THE NATION.
I BELIEVE THAT A STRONG BUSINESS CASE CAN BE MADE THAT THE SPACE PROGRAM LEADS TO ECONOMIC GROWTH THROUGH THE INVENTION OF NEW PRODUCTS WHICH STIMULATE NEW BUSINESSES AND INDEED WHOLE NEW INDUSTRIES. BUT I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT CASE TODAY, INDEED I BELIEVE YOU ARE MORE FAMILIAR WITH IT THAN I AM.
A CASE CAN BE MADE THAT SPACE EXPLORATION EXCITES OUR YOUNG PEOPLE TO STUDY SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, ENGINEERING – AREAS WHICH THE NATION IS DESPERATELY SHORT OF NEW COLLEGE GRADUATES. BUT I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT CASE TODAY.
A CASE CAN BE MADE THAT BY LOOKING BACK ON THE EARTH AND STUDYING OTHER PLANETS WE CAN BEST UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR CLIMATE AND PERHAPS HOW TO CONTROL IT. BUT I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT CASE TODAY.
THERE IS AN EVEN STRONGER CASE THAT SPACE ACTIVITIES HELP PROTECT OUR NATION MILITARILY; BUT I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT CASE TODAY.
I AM HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THE LONG TERM CONSEQUENCES OF SPACE EXPLORATION, OR OF NOT HAVING SPACE EXPLORATION.
I AM MINDFUL TODAY THAT WE CHOSE OUR OWN DESTINY. WE ARE FOUNDED BY PIONEERS WHO SAW OPPORTUNITY AND WHO HAD THE COURAGE AND ENERGY TO TAKE A CHANCE.
HISTORY TELLS US THAT THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES. IT IS NOT A GIVEN THAT THE UNITED STATES WILL ALWAYS BE GREAT. TODAY WE ARE THE WORLD’S ONLY SUPER POWER AND WHAT WE DO IN SPACE CONTRIBUTES TO THAT POSITION. WITHOUT CONTINUED COURAGE AND SWEAT, WE COULD FIND OURSELVES NO LONGER THE LEADER OF THE WORLD.
EVERYONE KNOWS THE QUOTATION FROM THE HISTORIAN GEORGE SANTAYANA: “THOSE WHO DO NOT LEARN FROM THE PAST ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT”. AND SO, TODAY, I HAVE A LITTLE HISTORY LESSON FOR YOU TO THINK ABOUT IN THE DAYS TO COME.
FIVE HUNDRED YEARS AGO THERE WAS ONLY ONE SUPERPOWER IN THE WORLD: CHINA.
THE MING EMPIRE RULED A PEOPLE MORE NUMEROUS THAN THE ANCIENT ROMAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT, LARGER IN TERRITORY THAN MODERN RUSSIA, VASTLY MORE POWERFUL AND RICHER THAN ALL THE PETTY FIEFDOMS OF CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN EUROPE PUT TOGETHER.
THE MING EMPIRE WAS FABULOUSLY WEALTHY. THE EMPEROR WANTED A NEW CAPITOL: THEY BUILT THE CITY WE KNOW AS BEJING FROM EMPTY GRAZING LAND.
THE EMPEROR NEEDED TO FEED THE PEOPLE IN HIS NEW CITY: THEY BUILD THE GRAND CANAL, AN ENGINEERING FEAT NOT RIVALED UNTIL THE SUEZ AND PANAMA CANALS.
THE EMPEROR WANTED A NAVY, SO HE APPOINTED AN ADMIRAL TO BUILD A FLEET OF 1,500 SHIPS.
THE LARGEST OF THESE SHIPS RIVAL THE SIZE OF WWII’S SUPPORT AIRCRAFT CARRIERS; THEY WERE THE LARGEST WOODEN SHIPS EVER BUILT, THE LARGEST SAILING SHIPS EVER BUILT.
IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE AGE OF STEAM AND STEEL FOUR HUNDRED YEARS LATER THAT LARGER SHIPS BUILT. THERE WERE OVER 30,000 SAILORS IN THIS NAVY. CHINA WAS SO INCONCEIVABLY RICH IN THOSE DAYS THAT THE COST OF THIS VAST NAVY WAS AN INCONSEQUENTIAL FRACTION OF THE RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE EMPEROR.
THE CHINESE ADMIRALS SET OUT ON MANY VOYAGES OF DISCOVERY AND COMMERCE TO THE PHILIPPINES, MALAYSIA, INDIA, AND AS FAR AS THE EAST COAST OF AFRICA. FOR OVER 40 YEARS THE MING NAVY MADE MANY VOYAGES WHICH RESULTED IN CHINESE HEGEMONY: TOTAL POLITICAL CONTROL OVER HALF THE WORLD. NOT HALF THE “KNOWN WORLD” AS THOSE IGNORANT EUROPEANS MIGHT GUESS, BUT HALF THE TOTAL WORLD.
FROM THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE THROUGH INDIA TO THE BERING STRAIT, FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND TO THE WEST COAST OF THE AMERICAS, TRADE AND TRIBUTE POURED INTO CHINA. ALL OF THESE ACCOMPLISHMENTS ARE WELL DOCUMENTED AND WELL KNOWN TO HISTORIANS.
IN A RECENT BOOK, A RETIRED BRITISH ROYAL NAVY SEA CAPTAIN, GAVIN MENZIES, PROVIDES EVIDENCE THAT THE CHINESE NAVY CIRCUMNAVIGATED THE WORLD IN 1421, DISCOVERING ANTARCTICA IN THE SOUTH AND COMING WITHIN TWO HUNDRED MILES OF THE NORTH POLE IN THE OTHER DIRECTION.
CAPTAIN MENZIES HAS EVIDENCE THAT THE CHINESE SET UP COLONIES NOT JUST ON THE ORIENT FACING EAST COAST OF AFRICA, BUT ON THE WEST COAST AS WELL, CHINESE COLONIES IN THE CARIBBEAN, NEAR PRESENT DAY PROVIDENCE RHODE ISLAND, AND ON GREENLAND. WOW.
HOW DID THE EUROPEANS GET AN ACCURATE MAP OF THE WORLD 75 YEARS BEFORE COLUMBUS AND A CENTURY BEFORE MAGELLAN? FROM CHINA!
SO THE CHINESE WERE THE WORLDS GREATEST SUPERPOWER AND CONTROLLED HALF THE WORLD AND EXPLORED THE ENTIRE GLOBE
IN 1415, THE TINY PRINCIPALITY OF PORTUGAL PUT EVERYTHING ON THE LINE. PORTUGAL WAS INSOLVENT, ITS PRINCE IN DEBT AND HIS COURT THREADBARE. AFTER A HUGE DEBATE, THE PORTUGUESE BORROWED JUST ENOUGH MONEY TO FINANCE A FEW SHIPS AND THEIR CREWS.
WITH LESS THAN TWO DOZEN SHIPS - NONE OF THEM LARGE BY EVEN THE MISERABLE EUROPEAN STANDARD OF THE DAY – THE PORTUGUESE FOUGHT A SUCCESSFUL SEA BATTLE IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND CAPTURED THE PORT OF CEUTA ON THE NORTH AFRICAN COAST. THIS OPENED UP, EVER SO SLIGHTLY, TRADE WITH THE ORIENT, ESPECIALLY INCREASED TRADE IN THE HIGHLY DESIRED SPICES FROM THAT REGION.
THE SCRAPPY PORTUGUESE DECIDED TO GO FORWARD, LEARNING THE LESSON THAT TAKING RISKS WAS WORTHWHILE, AND LOSSES COULD BE ACCEPTED. THEY INVENTED A NEW TYPE OF SHIP SUITED FOR THE STORMY ATLANTIC, THE CARAVEL, THE FIRST REALLY NEW SHIP DESIGN SINCE ANCIENT TIMES.
THE CARAVEL BECAME ONLY THE FIRST IN A SERIES OF CONTINUALLY IMPROVING AND INNOVATIVE SHIP DESIGNS THAT HAVE CONTINUED EVEN TO THE PRESENT.
THE PORTUGUESE EARNED THE ADMIRATION AND ENVY OF ALL THE EUROPEAN STATES, AND EVERY COUNTRY TRIED TO EMULATE THEM.
THUS STARTED THE AGE OF WOODEN SHIPS AND IRON MEN.
OVER THE NEXT CENTURIES, THE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES REPEATEDLY DECIDED TO GO FORWARD, BY FITS AND BY STARTS, FOR GOOD REASONS AND FOR BAD ONES, ALWAYS WITH ENDLESS DEBATE, GENERALLY TEETERING ON THE EDGE OF FINANCIAL INSOLVENCY. BUT THE WEST EUROPEANS MADE THE DECISION TO GO FORWARD INTO THE WORLD FOR TRADE, TREASURE, DISCOVERY, AND GLORY. THEY IMMERSED THE WEST IN NEW IDEAS, NEW TECHNOLOGIES, AND NEW INNOVATIONS.
BACK IN CHINA, AFTER A GENERATION OF ASTOUNDING VOYAGES, THE GREAT MING ADMIRAL DIED AT SEA. THE EMPEROR ALSO DIED, AND THE NEW EMPEROR CAME UNDER DIFFERENT INFLUENCES.
THESE VOICES COUNSELED THE YOUNG EMPEROR TO TURN INWARD. SURELY CHINA HAD ENOUGH PROBLEMS TO SOLVE IN CHINA, WHY WASTE TIME AND ENERGY EXPLORING? THESE ADVISORS TOLD THE EMPEROR THAT THERE WAS NOTHING IN THE WORLD TO MATCH CHINESE CULTURE - TRUE. THEY TOLD THE EMPEROR THERE WERE NO GOODS IN THE WORLD TO RIVAL CHINESE GOODS - TRUE. IN SHORT, THEY CONCLUDED, THERE WAS NOTHING OUT THERE FOR CHINA – A CONCLUSION THAT SOUNDED LOGICAL BUT WAS FAR FROM TRUE.
THEY ADVISED THAT CHINA SHOULD PROTECT WHAT THEY HAD FROM THE FOREIGNERS. FOREIGNERS WHO WANTED WHAT THE CHINESE HAD. THE EMPEROR FOLLOWED THIS ADVICE. HE COMPLETED THE GREAT WALL TO KEEP FOREIGNERS OUT. HE BUILT A NEW CAPITAL, A “FORBIDDEN CITY” TO KEEP THE CITIZENS OF HIS OWN COUNTRY OUT.
THE EMPEROR ORDERED THAT THE FLEET BE BURNED. THE SAILORS WERE DISBANDED. IT BECAME A CAPITAL OFFENSE TO BUILD A SAILING SHIP WITH MORE THAN TWO MASTS. THE EMPEROR EVEN ORDERED THAT ALL THE RECORDS OF ALL THE VOYAGES BE BURNED. CHINA TURNED INWARD.
WHEN THE PORTUGUESE EXPLORERS BERNARDO DIAS AND VASCO DE GAMA ROUNDED THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE FROM THE WEST TO THE EAST, THEY FOUND LEGENDS OF WHITE GHOST SHIPS THAT HAD COME TWO GENERATIONS EARLIER. AFRICANS ALL ALONG THE EAST COAST WERE WEARING CHINESE STYLE HATS AND CLOTHES.
WHEN MAGELLAN CROSSED THE PACIFIC OCEAN AND CLAIMED THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS FOR KING CHARLES OF SPAIN HE FOUND SILK AND PORCELAIN, ALL IMPORTED FROM CHINA YEARS BEFORE, BUT THE TRADERS THAT BROUGHT THEM HAD VANISHED.
ALL THROUGHOUT THE INDIES, EUROPEANS FOUND REMNANTS OF A CULTURE THAT HAD BEEN OF GREAT INFLUENCE BUT WHICH HAD DISAPPEARED COMPLETELY FROM THE SCENE: CHINESE CULTURE.
THE CHINESE COURSE LED INEXORABLY TO STAGNATION, THEN DISSOLUTION, THEN DECAY, AND FINALLY TO DESTRUCTION. FOR THERE CAME A DAY WHEN THE PORTUGUESE AND THE OTHER EUROPEANS CARVED UP THE PITIFULLY WEAK REMNANTS OF CHINA FOR THEIR OWN COLONIAL USE.
FIVE HUNDRED YEARS LATER, THE GREAT 20TH CHINESE HISTORIAN WEI PU CONCLUDED THE CHOICE OF DIRECTION WAS CRITICAL. THE CHINESE TURNED INWARD, THE EUROPEANS WENT FORWARD. THAT CHINESE HISTORIAN OBSERVED: “THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD FOR THE LAST 500 YEARS HAS BEEN THE HISTORY OF THE WEST.”
CHOICES MATTER. THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES, SOME UNSEEN AT THE TIME. BUT ONE CONSTANT HAS HELD THROUGH HUMAN HISTORY; TAKING RISKS TO FIND NEW KNOWLEDGE, NEW LANDS, AND NEW WAYS OF DOING THINGS, NEW CULTURES, AND NEW IDEAS HAS ALWAYS PAID OFF. STAYING HOME IS THE SHORT ROAD TO FAILURE.
SO ARE WE, TODAY, TO BE THE CHINESE OR THE PORTUGUESE? WHICH DIRECTION WILL OUR COUNTRY CHOOSE? THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES, ONLY REWARDS FOR THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO SEIZE OPPORTUNITY, TAKE RISKS, WORK HARD, AND SHOW COURAGE.
THE CHINESE HAVE LEARNED THIS LESSON FROM HISTORY. WILL WE?
Carrying the Torch
Posted on Jul 19, 2009 04:04:50 PM | Wayne Hale
I've said before that the exploration of space reminds me of the Olympic torch relay. So here is a note to all you relay runners who carry the torch every day in your work; to those who have retired from the race, and to those who dream of carrying the fire one day.
Not everybody gets to carry the torch up the stadium steps and light the cauldron in the presence of tens of thousands and the virtual presence of tens of millions. Only a very few get to carry the torch in moments of glory.
Not everyone who carries the torch is remembered, only a few names are ever announced.
Not everybody gets to carry the torch over the mountain tops, just a handful get to carry the fire through magnificent vistas.
Not everybody gets to carry the torch where it is cheered on by adoring crowds.
Somebody has to carry the torch in the rain, somebody has to carry the torch through the valley, somebody has to carry the torch through the warehouse district and the swamp. Somebody even has to carry the torch in places where the onlookers jeer.
But the the torch has to be carried. If the flame is ever to reach its goal, if the cheering multitudes are ever to see the final runner holding the torch high, it must to be carried.
Space exploration is like that. Some days are glorious days, some days are awful, and most days can be tedious.
But if we stumble, and the torch falls, and the light goes out, then all the dreams and all the sweat of all of those who came before us will be for nought. And all the hopes for those who might have carried the torch after us will fade away in the night.
We don't get to chose the section of the course we run. We just get to carry the torch.
Celebrate with those who carried the torch in glory days. Know that glory days will come again.
Don't forget to hold it high, even in ordinary times, even in the presence of those who jeer.
Because those who carry the torch, carry the future in their hands.
Because even if you have to run through the desert and never hear the cheering throngs, you are still carrying the fire.
And how well you run your distance is the only reward that is truly worth having.
ISS has given the US a great deal of experience in zero-g. Before ISS the russians were kicking our behind with that experience.
It's just a shame that there is no plan to test some of the centrifigal beds that they have been experimenting with recently. There was a recent study showing no muscle loss in bed rest subjects who were subjected to 2.5 g for one hour a day in a bed spinning at 30rpm. One hour a day wouldnt be bad for astronauts.
If we could do zero-g mitigation testing on ISS, it would be worth a great deal. Such a shame.
It's just a shame that there is no plan to test some of the centrifigal beds that they have been experimenting with recently. There was a recent study showing no muscle loss in bed rest subjects who were subjected to 2.5 g for one hour a day in a bed spinning at 30rpm. One hour a day wouldnt be bad for astronauts.
If we could do zero-g mitigation testing on ISS, it would be worth a great deal. Such a shame.
There is a Russian segment and American segment, and the Russians are working and sleeping in the Russian segment - other specific US services aboard the station are paid for by the Russians separately on the pay as you go basis (and vice versa for the US).ISS_Fan":30bjc83f said:
Man, perhaps you can negotiate with your university to have them half the price of your dormitory, because your professors' offices and classrooms are occupying 50% of the campus premises, and therefore you should only be paying 50% of what you're asked to pay. Good luck in your quest for the "fair" deal.
But, of course this arrangment does imply that the Russians are responsible for 50% of the passenger transport costs to the ISS.
@Testing - Bravo. Keep giving that speech anywhere they will let you give it. Don't let up. To everyone else--go to the library. Get a copy of "The Discoverers" by Daniel Boorstin. Read it cover to cover. It's a big book--you'll have time to think. Then wait six months and read it again. After the second time, you'll begin to understand what @Testing is talking about, and why we must, MUST support ISS, and go back to the Moon, at least as a proving ground, and then on to Mars and beyond. I have no problem with international participation. These missions are so vast they almost demand it. But the vision, the drive, and the innovation must come from us, or we will become like the Ming Dynasty--something for future generations to study, to gather our artifacts for their collections, and to learn their lessons from our shortsightedness.
jerrycobbs":1q5dcdgk said:
Just a clarification.
Those are Wayne Hale's words, not mine.
I just happen to agree.
The Space Station will end in 2016, NASA will make the Space Station fall back into into the atmosphere, where it will turn into a fireball and then crash into the Pacific Ocean. It will be a controlled re-entry, but it will be distroyed. This is NASA's plan, pending a change in policy. There is no long term funding on the books for space station operations beyond 2015...
If we are really going to destroy the ISS in 2015, or thereabouts, I hope the Mayans are right about 2012. The ISS is not Heinlein's or Clarke's space station, but it is the only platform we have for testing the technologies that will be mandatory to live and work in space. We need to keep adding on modules and increasing capabilities. We need to try different ways of doing the same things to see which methods are improvements, which offer no gain, and which take us back a step or two. Rather than see the current ISS as an end to itself, we need to see it as our lab and training vehicle. Rather than debate whether or not we can afford it we need to figure out how to increase funding. The only safe way to double your money is to fold it in half and put it back in your pocket. That is a parlor trick, not an investment strategy. We need to see the ISS for what it is: an investment in our future. If we don't want a future then let's just burn it up and pull back to the caves we were huddling in 75,000 years ago.
-- Bill
-- Bill
@ISS_Fan....thanks that went a long way toward answering my question. I realize tha the answer to my question also depends on what vehicle or company we use to service the station. If we continue with the Space Shuttle that will be one cost and if we use the Ares/Orion system that will be another. Also, if we are indeed able to use SpaceX's Falcon/Dragon system that represents another cost set. I guess what I would like to see are some number estimates for the most likely possible servicing scenarios....like continuing the shuttle or using Ares/Orion or SpaceX.
@Bill Wright.....I agree with you completely as well. One of the most frustrating things about Nasa and our future is that we seem to be facing false choices by our Government. Obama says that he wants to remain within the existing Nasa budget because there is no more money however, he keeps pulling dollar bills out of his top hat for everything else. It all comes down to priorities or, what you think is important..and unfortunately cash for clunkers was given billions more on a whim while Nasa continues to flail in the wind like a dry leaf...bereft of funding and leadership.
@Bill Wright.....I agree with you completely as well. One of the most frustrating things about Nasa and our future is that we seem to be facing false choices by our Government. Obama says that he wants to remain within the existing Nasa budget because there is no more money however, he keeps pulling dollar bills out of his top hat for everything else. It all comes down to priorities or, what you think is important..and unfortunately cash for clunkers was given billions more on a whim while Nasa continues to flail in the wind like a dry leaf...bereft of funding and leadership.
The cost of maintaining the ISS will eventually increase to the point that the funders begin extracting their support for lack of something in return. The owner of a white elephant first tries to hire cheap labor to take care of it. When that doesn’t work they either destroy it or trick someone else into feeding it. They rarely ever put the white elephant on a diet but this option is what I am proposing since the option of cheap labor still has time to run its course (give them a chance) and the other two options are not popular with people who support the ISS funding.
The cost of maintaining the ISS is one reason for getting new supply services involved. They have virtually zero reliability since they have no comparable launch successes. This fact injects risk into the equation of maintaining the ISS. That may be why they currently have two supply services. They are assuming one of them will wash out. This could work. It could backfire. No one knows. The risk has been accepted. Let’s let it runs it’s course for the time being. This option, however, only lowers the cost of maintaining the ISS. It does not have any real scientific return since all they do is deliver and return stuff in a timely manner.
A way to lower the cost of maintaining the ISS and get some scientific return that funding supporters dare not cut is to lower the launch rate to one or two launches per year that changes out the crew and adds needed supplies. Right now, the launch rate is so beefed up that it is confusing to the public, just who is up there at any given time. They need to change out crews on a staggered basis to benefit their psychological well-being and rehabilitate their bone structure back on the ground. If they force them to stay longer than 6 months, they risk additional bone loss that could result in long term bone damage.
Now, we can all agree that 0 G is hurting astronauts. Although “Hurt” is a subjective term, recognizing that stopping the “Hurt” is the key to the ISS’s long term survival. Stopping bone loss leads to extending the crew’s stay which lowers the launch rate. VIOLA! Lower the cost of maintaining the ISS and get some real scientific results that would have an Earth-shattering impact on Earth worldwide. Like Yoda once said, “Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Something always leads to another thing.
There is no real need to study and measure the level of “Hurt” anymore. When you tell the doctor “It hurts when I do this.” He says “Don’t do that.” We need to redirect this funding to finding a realistic way of stopping bone loss using current technology and existing space research platforms with no drugs or vitamin supplements.
There are 4 centrifuges currently on the ISS. They all study non-bone living things. They occupy some pretty valuable pressurized airspace that could be devoted to a centrifuge type device that studies intermittent artificial gravity applications on living things with bone. Start out small, and work your way up the mammal chain.
This area of bone loss study and space research using real space stuff could culminate, some day, in an exercise device that the crew uses on a daily basis to receive a prescribed dose of intermittent artificial gravity that stops their bone loss and subsequently allows astronauts to live and work in space much longer than the current time limit of 6 months.
It can be explained by doctors that gravity plays an important role in the process of maintaining bone. I am not a doctor, so I cannot talk about it here. Just go ask a bone doctor like I did. Why do you think doctor’s sometimes prescribe patients with Osteoporosis to walk each day? It is not strenuous exercise, is it?
The other part of the long term space equation can be addressed with ground training of astronauts that live secluded from physical contact with family and friends for long periods of time on the ground, like in a Biosphere or underwater living facility before heading into space to live and work there for a long time. Kind of like what people do in college before finding a real job after they graduate. The ones that succeed commit a crazy amount of study on subjects they never use in the real world before being considered to be hired by a corporation or a scientific research center. This is already being done to some extent at the NOAA’s Aquarius Reef Base in Key Largo, Florida.
The cost of maintaining the ISS is one reason for getting new supply services involved. They have virtually zero reliability since they have no comparable launch successes. This fact injects risk into the equation of maintaining the ISS. That may be why they currently have two supply services. They are assuming one of them will wash out. This could work. It could backfire. No one knows. The risk has been accepted. Let’s let it runs it’s course for the time being. This option, however, only lowers the cost of maintaining the ISS. It does not have any real scientific return since all they do is deliver and return stuff in a timely manner.
A way to lower the cost of maintaining the ISS and get some scientific return that funding supporters dare not cut is to lower the launch rate to one or two launches per year that changes out the crew and adds needed supplies. Right now, the launch rate is so beefed up that it is confusing to the public, just who is up there at any given time. They need to change out crews on a staggered basis to benefit their psychological well-being and rehabilitate their bone structure back on the ground. If they force them to stay longer than 6 months, they risk additional bone loss that could result in long term bone damage.
Now, we can all agree that 0 G is hurting astronauts. Although “Hurt” is a subjective term, recognizing that stopping the “Hurt” is the key to the ISS’s long term survival. Stopping bone loss leads to extending the crew’s stay which lowers the launch rate. VIOLA! Lower the cost of maintaining the ISS and get some real scientific results that would have an Earth-shattering impact on Earth worldwide. Like Yoda once said, “Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Something always leads to another thing.
There is no real need to study and measure the level of “Hurt” anymore. When you tell the doctor “It hurts when I do this.” He says “Don’t do that.” We need to redirect this funding to finding a realistic way of stopping bone loss using current technology and existing space research platforms with no drugs or vitamin supplements.
There are 4 centrifuges currently on the ISS. They all study non-bone living things. They occupy some pretty valuable pressurized airspace that could be devoted to a centrifuge type device that studies intermittent artificial gravity applications on living things with bone. Start out small, and work your way up the mammal chain.
This area of bone loss study and space research using real space stuff could culminate, some day, in an exercise device that the crew uses on a daily basis to receive a prescribed dose of intermittent artificial gravity that stops their bone loss and subsequently allows astronauts to live and work in space much longer than the current time limit of 6 months.
It can be explained by doctors that gravity plays an important role in the process of maintaining bone. I am not a doctor, so I cannot talk about it here. Just go ask a bone doctor like I did. Why do you think doctor’s sometimes prescribe patients with Osteoporosis to walk each day? It is not strenuous exercise, is it?
The other part of the long term space equation can be addressed with ground training of astronauts that live secluded from physical contact with family and friends for long periods of time on the ground, like in a Biosphere or underwater living facility before heading into space to live and work there for a long time. Kind of like what people do in college before finding a real job after they graduate. The ones that succeed commit a crazy amount of study on subjects they never use in the real world before being considered to be hired by a corporation or a scientific research center. This is already being done to some extent at the NOAA’s Aquarius Reef Base in Key Largo, Florida.
Bill_Wright":34i8zapi said:
A Bigelow prototype is up there right now. Perhaps if the government says, "We will splash ISS in 2015, but we will budget $500 million a year for orbital science on any commercially available platform", then Bigelow or SpaceX's planned Dragon lab or something else will get some serious private funding behind it.
If there really is good and important science that can be conducted and knowledge that can be gained from being in LEO, let the government fund the research, but let commercial companies provide the service.
There is a long history of concern that when the government is in a field, it detracts commercial investment because the government is seen as a competitor that is willing to conduct business at a loss.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 190
-
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 38
-
How 2024 brought us deeper into the world of particles
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 1
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram