My fears, please dispell

[BReif]

Lately, I have been somewhat pessimistic about the future of space exploration in general, and manned spaceflight in particular. I think it has much to do with the continuing delays of STS-121, and the negative threads and posts that are frequently encountered on these boards these days.<br /><br />My fears are as follows:<br /><br />Shuttle will fly one more time, but after foam sheds from the ET yet again, the shuttle will be grounded permanently.<br /><br />Astronauts will continue to fly to ISS on Soyuz for 2 or 3 more expeditions, but a new Congress/New President will terminate ISS, and no more missions will be flown<br /><br />New President/Congress will terminate all funding and work on the Vision for Space Exploration, canceling the CEV, and all vehicles needed to continue manned spaceflight.<br /><br />Result: No manned spaceflight or manned exploration after 2012.<br /><br />This, then, results in cuts to unmanned programs as well, resulting in no space program by 2020.<br /><br />Please help me get out of this pessimism...

 

[alonzofyfe]

First Dispellishment<br /><br />Why be passive? Whenever somebody comes to me with a lament about how the world is going to turn out, I ask, "And what are you going to do about it?"<br /><br />If they say, "Nothing", then I see no choice but to leave them to their lamenting. I have better things to do.<br /><br />If, instead, they are willing to do something, then I repeat the question, "What are you going to do about it?"<br /><br />Item 2: Human space development can easily continue without NASA. Russia, China, and Japan all have aspirations to send people to the moon. More importantly, a lot of individuals think that it is important that the human race not be confined to Earth.<br /><br />We will soon have a suborbital space flight industry. Bigalow Aerospace is working on inexensive space station and many people are working on manned private commercial orbital flights -- which will become that much more common once Bigalow (or Virgin Galactic) puts up a space station for them to visit.<br /><br />There are a dozen organizations that you can join if you would like to help, from the Mars Society to the Planetary Society to the Space Frontier Foundation, to name a few. The more work you are willing to do to help such an organization, the more space development we will see.

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">Shuttle will fly one more time, but after foam sheds from the ET yet again, the shuttle will be grounded permanently.</font>/i><br /><br />A definite possibility.<br /><br /> /> <i><font color="yellow">Astronauts will continue to fly to ISS on Soyuz for 2 or 3 more expeditions, but a new Congress/New President will terminate ISS, and no more missions will be flown</font>/i><br /><br />Unlikely as, at the very least, Russia will continue to support it for some time to come. If the shuttle is grounded, the most likely US scenario will be an acceleration of the CEV or the CEV and HLV.<br /><br /> /> <i><font color="yellow">New President/Congress will terminate all funding and work on the Vision for Space Exploration, canceling the CEV, and all vehicles needed to continue manned spaceflight.</font>/i><br /><br />Very unlikely. (1) I don't remember when the last time Congress has been this supportive of Congress. Despite the headlines in the newspapers, when you actually watch the full video Griffin giving testomony in front of Congress, it is a complete love fest. Congress loves this guy.<br /><br />(2) For better or worse, the space program supports lots of jobs, and those congressmen and women will fight to preserve those jobs. For example, the competitors for the CEV are each touting how many jobs they will bring to which areas if they win the contract.<br /><br />(3) Then there is national prestige. There is no way the US is going to walk away from manned space exploration and leave it to the Russians and Chinese.<br /><br /> /> <i><font color="yellow">Result: No manned spaceflight or manned exploration after 2012.</font>/i><br /><br />Even in the worse case scenario (the US government does stop funding NASA for manned space exploration) there will still be manned space exploration. Russia and China will continue to go, and other countries will continue to hitch a ride up with at least the Russians</i></i></i></i>

 

[vogon13]

I have already speculated here that with all the cameras on the shuttle now, I expect to see something scary on every launch . . .<br /><br /><br />Sigh.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[askold]

I wouldn't disparage the entire space program because of the failings/limitations of the shuttle/ISS. The science missions are going very well. The problem is that the shuttle/ISS is a black hole for money. The space program will be better off when they're both gone - we'll be able to get some real work done.

 

[qso1]

brief:<br />Shuttle will fly one more time, but after foam sheds from the ET yet again, the shuttle will be grounded permanently. <br /><br />Me:<br />This certainly could happen.<br /><br />brief:<br />Astronauts will continue to fly to ISS on Soyuz for 2 or 3 more expeditions, but a new Congress/New President will terminate ISS, and no more missions will be flown<br /><br />Me:<br />It would be a political disaster for us to abandon ISS. Our international partners would consider us no longer trustworthy on future agreements on projects of such magnitude. Thats one reason the ISS has survived as long as it has.<br /><br />brief:<br />This, then, results in cuts to unmanned programs as well, resulting in no space program by 2020.<br /><br />Me:<br />This is highly unlikely simply because the public and politicians generally support unmanned space exploration. Unmanned is far less expensive than manned. Tax payer funded manned flight could end under a new Administration which will likely be Democrats this time.<br /><br />Private industry will probably take over manned spaceflight, at least to LEO anyway. This frees NASA up to fund exploration vehicles to the Moon or Mars. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[josh_simonson]

And no matter what, the military needs access to space, so we'll need to be building rockets and satelites no matter what. With that infrastructure in place, might as well use it for other things too.

 

[BReif]

I actually am a member of the National Space Society and the Planetary Society, and have spend a good deal of time writing to members of the US House and Senate about the space program, advocating an increase in funding. Far from doing nothing, I have done a great deal of lobbying for a future in space. What I see is many being willing to walk away from it.

 

[trailrider]

I dropped my crystal ball and broke it since the return of the Discovery flight with the near-miss and the problems they are having with the tank fuel sensors, etc, so I'll have to wing it!<br /><br /><br />Breif: Shuttle will fly one more time, but after foam sheds from the ET yet again, the shuttle will be grounded permanently.<br /><br />TR: Hopefully that is all that will happen... If we, God forbid, lose a crew, bank on it! <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /> <br /><br />Breif: Astronauts will continue to fly to ISS on Soyuz for 2 or 3 more expeditions, but a new Congress/New President will terminate ISS, and no more missions will be flown<br /><br />TR: The problem is not so much Congress "cancelling" the ISS, as the lack of a means to finish it, if the Shuttles are permanently grounded. IF that happens, there is a high probability that the ISS would be "man-tended" on a limited, non-continuous basis, at least until some alternative can be kluged-up.<br /><br />Regardless of what WE do, our European partners, including the Russians, have a BUNCH invested in the ISS, so much so that they will be VERY unhappy if it cannot be finished in some form or another.<br /><br />Just what could be done to replace the lift capability of the Shuttle, I haven't done any trade studies on. <br /><br />Breif: New President/Congress will terminate all funding and work on the Vision for Space Exploration, canceling the CEV, and all vehicles needed to continue manned spaceflight.<br /><br />TR: A possibility. But this would effectively leave everything to China, Japan, India and possibly a Euro-consortium. U.S. prestige will suffer, and U.S. technology will take a backseat to the rest of the world.<br /><br />It is possble that a new President and Congress could scale back manned exploration for a number of years. Again, my crystal ball is broken! I HOPE NOT! <br /><br />Breif: Result: No manned spaceflight or manned exploration after 2012.<br /><br />TR: If the worst happens as you suggest, w

 

[hansolo0]

Wow some really negative nellies here, it's always easier to be negative than positive, look at all the negative predictions of doom and gloom in past years that never came true: Killer bees, Y2k, West Nile Virus, all the latest internet viruses...etc, etc <br /><br />It's easy now to be negative because of the way things are. We might have another episode with a foam near miss, (and it's amazing the shuttle never had this problem before now i.e. the Columbia disaster) but I predict it will mostly be smooth sailing and this will be a forgotten memory. <br /><br />What kills me is that they put all of their eggs in one basket with the shuttle,<br />while it is a great piece of work, it's falling apart and is the only thing that can get the iss together. I hope they accelerate a contingency plan. (cev cargo , etc)<br />The shuttle really set back manned spaceflight imho more than it helped

 

[vogon13]

Killer (Africanized) bees are a large and growing problem.<br /><br />West Nile is worse every summer.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[mikeemmert]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Breif: Shuttle will fly one more time, but after foam sheds from the ET yet again, the shuttle will be grounded permanently. <br /><br />TR: Hopefully that is all that will happen... If we, God forbid, lose a crew, bank on it! <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>I think you guys are totally, completely wrong. Horrifying as it is, and I also certainly don't want this to happen, losing another crew will have exactly the opposite effect on space travel.<br /><br />Remember, the Jamestown colonists lost 4500 out of 6000 people, and it did not stop emigration to the Americas. There were heavy losses in the American Civil War and World War II, but the cause was considered just and so the nation persevered. Exploration has always been dangerous, but people have always accepted the risk. People were lost building the Transcontinental Railroad, the Panama Canal, Hoover Dam, all kinds of projects, yet they were seen through to completion. The Titanic sank and people still sailed across the Atlantic. Crew after crew after crew were lost on Mount Everest, but not only did they not stop climbing, but also they kept going up even after the task was done. Challenger exploded and 75% of the people said to go on; Columbia burned and 75% of the people said to go on.<br /><br />If a politician cancels the space program because the odds ran out on some crew, or even several of them, that politician is deadmeat carreerwise. He will be seen as a coward and a defeatist. All the things I brought out above will resurface.<br /><br />Suddenly, America will look primitive in front of the Russian, the Chinese, and even the Indians.<br /><br />When Jean-François Pilâtre de Rozier became the first man to fly through the air, France was electrified. When he tried a hot air/hydrogen hybrid balloon and plunged to his death, mankind did not give up b

 

[darkenfast]

Sadly (because I have been a strong supporter of the ESAS program), I find myself expecting the end of an effective manned space program in the western world in a few years. <br /><br />Why the turnabout in my attitude? With the refusal of the US government to maintain control of our own borders, we have started the breakup of the United States as we know it. It doesn't matter how many skilled engineers and scientists the space program employs, they no longer count. The 12 million illegal aliens in the US do not work in those kinds of jobs, nor are they interested in space exploration. The left-wing politicians who support those illegals (and who want to give them the vote) do not care for the elitism of the space program, as it's not about the people who really matter to them. Some conservative politicans have joined them to appease those who demand cheap illegal labor. When the Southwest either forms its own ethnic conclave or unites with Mexico, the union will break up. The already damaged economy will be steamrollered by China (largely using technology, skills and financing acquired from us). <br /><br />Meanwhile, in the next few years, parts of Europe will come under Sharia law, and the European economy will disintegrate. The lack of any reform in France shows the direction of things there. The millions of Muslims in Europe are not interested in space travel. Of the European nations, only Russia has a chance, but only if they can weather the loss of financing from the West. <br /><br />That leaves China. They will continue manned space flight as long as it enhances their prestige, or if the rulers decide that is a national security issue. If that happens, then based on their behavior in Tibet and in the South China Sea, look for space to eventually declared a PRC security zone. <br /><br />I came to this conclusion very reluctantly. It was when I realized that, no matter what the American people wanted, the borders were going to remain effe

 

[mikeemmert]

Pessimist <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" />

 

[BReif]

A very strong point about how no one government program stands alone or isolated from other programs and policies. Unfortunately, I have to agree with you, that unless things change, it will all disappear (the United States, our economy, etc.) However, I disagree that we have reached the of no return, but it is very close.

 

[BReif]

I do hope that you are correct about the American people being willing to continue to push forward, however, it seems that the American people are far more risk averse these days than even just 50 years ago. How does risk aversion get addressed?

 

[barrykirk]

You become less risk averse when you have nothing to lose or feel you have nothing to lose.<br /><br />The antithesis of risk averse would be a suicide bomber.<br /><br />These are people who feel or are convinced by others that they have nothing to lose.<br /><br />Between the two extremes of no risk aversion and complete risk averision is the happy middle ground of mental stability and happiness.<br /><br />Note that people at both ends of the spectrum are fundmentally out of mental balance and are unhappy with their lives.

 

[vt_hokie]

darkenfast,<br /><br />I think you are being overly pessimistic, but there's some truth there. It's largely this nation's own fault, though. Perhaps if we stopped viewing Latin America as just a source of cheap labor to exploit, and stopped intefering in their political affairs by propping up corrupt puppet regimes, that part of the world could develop its own economic prosperity. As long as there is widespread poverty, the problem will not go away no matter how secure we try to make the border.

 

[vt_hokie]

<i>I think that it is entirely possible that SpaceX or t/space is able to get a private manned spaceflight business going. If worse comes to worse and NASA is left without it's own human spaceflight program, they could always buy the services of SpaceX or t/space at a price much lower than that of the Shuttle and potentially the CEV.</i><br /><br />I'd really like to know if there's any truth to the "Blackstar" story, and if so whether its technology could be applied toward future space access.

 

[mikeemmert]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>"...Pessimist..." <br /><br />Realist.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>No sir. Go back and find the polls right after the Challenger and Columbia missions. The people wanted to go on.<br /><br />It's quite amazing to see more pessimism on this board than in the general public. You read too many newspaper pundits and listen to too many talking heads. Look at the polls instead.

 

[qso1]

josh_simonson:<br />And no matter what, the military needs access to space, so we'll need to be building rockets and satelites no matter what. With that infrastructure in place, might as well use it for other things too.<br /><br />Me:<br />Military space spending is under the DOD budget. They would not be affected other than the fact that if NASA folded, the military would have to buy up the rockets left in the wake of such a scenario. Rockets that were largely developed by the military. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[lbiderman]

vt_hokie is right here. Anyway, darkenfast, I understand you worked with the US military for a long time, but that doesn't mean your area of expertise is international relations. As a specialist in that area, I can tell you that the outcome you predict is highly unlikely. Why is that? Because the United States won't dissapear! The world changed enough, regional integration shows you that, but mainly, that the Soviet Union fell, the bipolar system was destroyed, but there was no war in the process - it was a (almost) peaceful transition, like no one in history. The american space program will prevail, as the US will, and the problem isn't the inmigration, is poverty, as vt_hokie says. And, BTW, we don't longer have puppet regimes.<br /><br />Returning to the subject, right now there are a lot of spacefaring nations, and probably there will be more anytime soon. This is actually good for the american space program: less money to spend! Even though the ISS sucked a lot of money, the cooperation allowed to do a lot more that what a single country can do today. It is my true belief that it will continue that way, and even better.

 

[ldyaidan]

I wonder what kind of response we would have from the general public if we got petitions going for better funding for the space program. I know there are lots of online things, but what I'm talking about is a unified effort, with people standing out in front of walmart or the grocery store, asking registered voters to sign. We can even have info available on the advantages of the space program, including, new technologies, new jobs, the old American spirit of adventure and so on. A) Any opinions on this, B) anyone willing to do it, and C) what do you think the chances are of getting the existing space advocacy groups to participate?<br /><br /><br />Rae

 

[baktothemoon]

Didn't you make a thread for that already ldyaidan? "Generating public support for the Space Program"? You should ressurrect that thread, it had some good stuff going in it.

 

[ldyaidan]

Yes, still trying to figure out how to word a letter to the space agencies. Any suggestions? I really would like to get something started, but am not sure exactly where to start. Hopefully things will slow down a little and I can work on it over the weekend.