Obama aims to ax moon mission

[frodo1008]

Jim48, sorry but even the Apollo astronauts that went to the moon would be the first to argue your totally incorrect point!

We have NOT even begun to hardly explore the moon at all!! You that claim to be a scientist do not know that?

Actually, when I stated earlier that we had explored an area about the size of the San Fernando Vally, even there I was exaggerating! Perhaps the West End of that Vally (whose size I do have some idea about, as I have lived almost my entire life here) at best.

Now the total surface area of the moon is explorable (unlike a great deal of the Earth's surface that is buried under miles of Ocean water), and its area is about the same as the total areas of Australia and Africa put together.

Now, could you even begin to say that you had thoroughly explored both the continents of Australia AND Africa by exploring the West San Fernando Vally?

For instance, while some scientists may have suspected that there might be water ice in the deep and permanently dark craters at the poles of the moon, we certainly did not find out the truth of that until recently!

Then how about that part of the moon that is permanently hidden from the view of the Earth, just how many astronauts have walked there?

You know Jim48, I am quite possibly an insufferable elitist as some here seem to believe, and what has a tendency to get this particular educated elitist is when people here make ignorant remarks such as "Been there, done hat!"

As for Mars, it IS only some 400 times as far away at best than the nearby moon is. Don't you think that it just might conceivably make it far harder to reach if we do not first have a true space faring civilization between the Earth and the moon? One that is capable of using the fantastic resources of the moon to build such an infrastructure?

We are NOT going back to the moon at probably the south pole just to explore at all, we ARE going back to begin the exploitation of those resources that will make such further out explorations as Mars and even beyond even possible for mankind!

And yes, I have not only read, but even own Dr. Zubrin's excellent books, do you?

But I also have read and own the even better book by Dr. G. K. O'Neill, who knew and understood just what it is really going to take to get humanity into space as a space faring civilization far more than Dr. Zubrin did!!

Besides which, if we can not even get back to the moon, where we originally got back to some 40 years ago, just what makes you even begin to think that we could then get out those 400 times further to Mars? To say nothing of being able to even do anything useful or worthwhile when we got there!!

Evidently, what some are saying now is that it might even be too much for us to even go back to the moon, what makes you think that such people are EVER going to approve going all the way out to Mars?????

I do not really mean to be nasty or even sarcastic here, but this particular argument has been hashed over again and agin on these boards, and at least a large majority or so of those here (there WAS a pol taken over this, if somebody can find it and give the actual numbers, I would appreciate it) were totally convinced that going back to the moon was not only more important than going on to Mars at this time, but was even essential to even going further out to Mars and beyond at all!

Personally, I am more than willing to go with that majority, and making such statements as "Been there done that" gets my own goat just a little less than those that have denied that we ever actually set our footprints on the moon in the first place!! :x :x :x :x

But, nothing personal, Have an Excellent Day Anyway!!

 

[bearack]

Bearack, I know that we do not always agree here. But I must admit the more of your excellent posts that I see, the better I like you and your opinions!!

And your latest here certainly supports that view!

A truly fine post, and I do thank you for it!

Have A Truly Excellent Day!!

Why thank you master frodo.

Even thought we may have a difference in political ideologies, there are always something that people can find common ground to stand on.

I'm not for large government, but there are certain things that the government does have a responcability for. Space is one I feel is a vital role for the US government. Not only for research, but defense as well. I don't think that the US shouldn't be the only ones, however. I think going forward it would nice for government to work in concert with private industry, but I still feel strongly that government and NASA should be the primary in advancing future discoveries.

Edit for correction.

 

[frodo1008]

Bearack, I agree, great post!

What may be of interest to some here, is that I am really VERY proud of the US Military on this issue. They have evidently listened very well to their own civilian space scientists, and while we do have a very large military satellite presence in near Earth space, what we have NOT done is almost as important, we have not placed offensive types of weapons in near Earth space! So unlike the recent very bad experience by the Chinese Military, we have not had to learn the great lesson of near Earth military operations the hard way, a lesson that they had to learn the hard way.

That lesson is very simple, either God, (if you believe in Him as I do), or nature (if you take the more humanist approach to such things), has so arraigned the dynamics of orbital space science that any country taking offensive action against the satellites of others, not only wipes out those satellites, but starts in motion a chain reaction that can very well kill ALL satellites in near Earth space!!!

This would prove to be very harmful to such as the Chinese, as just where are they then going to sell all of those cheap cell phones to, when there are no more cell phones? The reason for this condition is a basic law of nature that no military can overcome. And that is simply that any object in order to stay in orbit above the Earth in near Earth space has to be moving at a velocity that makes the fastest bullets on Earth look like they are moving in slow motion! So only just a few hits on such volatile objects as space satellites so spreads out the human debris field that ALL human satellites (including the ISS) then become totally endangered by such an act!!

As I stated, I am really proud that the US military has been intelligent enough to learn such a lesson from science, and not the hard way through experimentation!! Chalk up one really big bonus point for our own military!!!

 

[MannyPim]

I had a very unexpected phone call today....

I was at work, around 3PM and I get a call on my cell phone from Al Jazera TV form London.
They wanted to know if the Space Advocacy community had an official position on obama's shutting down of the Return To The Moon program.

The reason they called me was they could not get a hold of the Executive Director of one of the organizations that I am a member of. I had been President of a local chapter of that particular organization and I guess they found my cell number somewhere.

But, since I am no longer in that position, and haven't been for almost 3 years, I declined to give an opinion. But... out of the blue.... the last thing I expected was a call from al Jazera......

 

[vladdrac]

Well you're obviously able to type. Pick carefully you're Orthopedic Surgeon. Look at the bright side. Do you really feel it now? I mean is not morphine and dilaudid courseing through you're veins? Take advantage of it to think without being bothered by you're body. The Privitization Schtick is really getting ready for the day when Taxpayer Paid For research and development actually produces practical transportation technology. When its done...just watch how fast it gets "Privatized". The US Government should make Space Transport a 'Government Corporation' whiich will for a fee transport anyone anywhere. There would not needs be any kind of income tax other than "freight costs".

 

[frodo1008]

Manny, isn't that the official Arabic TV station in UK?

If so, it only shows that everybody, including Arabic people, who are not always (but mostly) Muslim by the way, are interested in what we intend to do in space.

And that is kind of heartening, at least to me anyway!

 

[space_tycoon]

The problem is not that NASA is going to stop being funded. It's that obama has decided to shut down the Return To The Moon mission and everything that we were working on to get there.

....The end result is that NASA will be sucked dry of the last ounce of inspiration and forward looking vision that they provided... it will be put on a the WRONG mission.... (it's as if obama decided that the military was going to be used to paint houses or some such idiotic mal-allocation of resources).

Now ya got me confused, Manny... I thought you were the guy who always tells us government should be small, taxes are theft, people should do things for themselves, the private sector should handle most things...and I would agree with those sentiments!

Why should NASA be any different? What's wrong with trimming the fat and privatizing those operations that are currently not being done effciently?

As far as I'm concerned this is a smart move by Obama.

 

[MannyPim]

The problem is not that NASA is going to stop being funded. It's that obama has decided to shut down the Return To The Moon mission and everything that we were working on to get there.

....The end result is that NASA will be sucked dry of the last ounce of inspiration and forward looking vision that they provided... it will be put on a the WRONG mission.... (it's as if obama decided that the military was going to be used to paint houses or some such idiotic mal-allocation of resources).

Now ya got me confused, Manny... I thought you were the guy who always tells us government should be small, taxes are theft, people should do things for themselves, the private sector should handle most things...and I would agree with those sentiments!

Why should NASA be any different? What's wrong with trimming the fat and privatizing those operations that are currently not being done effciently?

As far as I'm concerned this is a smart move by Obama.

You are only confused because you choose to remember only part of what I have said in the past and to oversimplify for exageration and effect.
I have ALWAYS said that there is a legitimate role for the government to play in opening up space for settlement and commercialization in close parternship with the private sector. I have also explained that a reasonable case can be made that space technology and space capability fall under the clause for "providing for the general welfare". In this way it is similar to much of the government funded scientific research.

And I am all for privatizing as much of the space effort as possible.... but a goal of Returning to The Moon to build a Lunar Base is a major driver of technology and progress and removing it from the picture will adversely impact our progress in becoming a Space Faring Civilization. Of course I think we should outsource as much as possible to private companies.... but it is the job of our leaders to provide a vision and to drive progress so that we can begin deriving benefits from space within 50 years rather than having to wait another century.

And it may be a "smart move" as you say in an era where the economy is faultering and we need to cut back on government spending, but in light of obama's gargatuan and irresponsible ballooning deficits, shaving a few billion from NASA is ridiculous. And re0directing NASA to become a global warming research agency is just plain stupid.

 

[nimbus]

The moon is in reach if NASA had more than its usual measly 1/2% of the budget. But the public wouldn't have that. So the American public in effect agrees to keep a stranglehold on American pioneering of space.
Virtual money abounds in the present admin's budgets, but that doesn't make it any more responsible to build something as important as going to the Moon on such thin ice. Moving space development as far away from the erratic control of politics and into something as reliable as private industry is the best thing to do. There's more reason for approval of a solid basis (private industry) than an uncertain one (who knows if Obama might go really batpoop with spending and before you know it, it's 2012 and another radical reform shakes things up yet again).

 

[frodo1008]

Nimbus, I do not disagree with what you are saying in principle, it IS a good principle and idea!!

Unfortunately, in practice is does not quite work out that way. For instance the effort to build the Dragon materials handling capsule to get to the ISS is funded with COTS funding by NASA, and that is indeed governmental funding. And I would think that any follow on contracts for building that capsule into a vehicle for taking astronauts up to the ISS would also be governmental funded.

Now, Burt Rutan and Virgin Galactic are indeed an almost purely privately funded enterprise, but to my knowledge they are the only ones with a real chance at getting into space in any manner at all by such funding. And even there Rutan's Scaled Composites does indeed have some lucrative separate governmental contracts also (ot at least as some here have said).

And it is going to take at least some three more years for Virgin Galactic to not only show that its sub orbital efforts are safe and reliable, but also profitable. And those profits are going to then have to be enough to afford the next step for such pure private efforts, and that is to get a craft into orbital space at all.

And there will be many such steps ahead before such pure private efforts can even begin to think about getting even back to the moon, let alone on out as far as Mars and beyond.

Pure private efforts are NOT going to take further steps until the steps already taken can be shown to be safe, reliable, and profitable. In fact as things get more expensive and complicated the further out you go, it would be those very profits for earlier steps that would enable you to even think about going out further at all!!!

So while I agree that pure private efforts would be certainly more sure (at least if there are VERY few setbacks), they will actually take far longer than even governmental funding would!

Perhaps, as many here have suggested (and I am perfectly happy to go along with) it is a combination of such afforts and governmental efforts that will prove to be the most affective in ths long run.

And I certainly agree with you about NASA funding being far too low at 0.5%, which with the far higher current federal governmental budgets is actually closer to 0.4% or possibly even 0.3% of the federal budget.

What is so very sad it that it would take so very little to boost those NASA funds to a more respectable level, which would indeed also help out such excellent private alt.space companies as spacex also! Such an increase would be a true governmental stimulus package!!

We seem to have literally hundreds of $billions of dollars (or even a $trillion or more, yes Manny, I do agree in total with you on this point) to give to Wall Street bankers, and almost nothing in comparison for one of the most successful programs and agencies in the history of this country! With this kind of thinking on the parts of both the president and Congress, is it any wonder that Main Street America is now "Mad as Hell, and does not want to take it anymore!!" The only problem to me at least is that the Republicans would not be any better, and might even be worse in this particular area!

So just who can the types of space geeks here vote for? I wish I knew!!! :x

At any rate, do have an excellent day!!

 

[MannyPim]

Frodo, how could you forget Bigelow.... They are about to deploy a totally private Space Station !
And they have big plans that even include going to the Moon.

 

[jimglenn]

Obama be developed his own inflatable hotel, you know what I'm sayin. They are concrete, and

a little heavy, and you don't need to inflate them, that saves a step. So biggy is out of biz. Wrong race. :|

 

[space_tycoon]

And I am all for privatizing as much of the space effort as possible.... but a goal of Returning to The Moon to build a Lunar Base is a major driver of technology and progress and removing it from the picture will adversely impact our progress in becoming a Space Faring Civilization. Of course I think we should outsource as much as possible to private companies.... but it is the job of our leaders to provide a vision and to drive progress so that we can begin deriving benefits from space within 50 years rather than having to wait another century.

Who sez that returning to the moon has been "removed it from the picture?" All that I see is a re-ordering of priorities, a fundamental restructuring of the way that we do space. The Kennedy/Johnson paradigm is over; a businesslike approach is the order of the day. Our first priority should be Cheap Access To Space; reducing launch costs to orbit by orders of magnitude. Everything else flows from that--including the Moon. Especially the Moon.

Constellation would have been "Apollo on Steroids." In other words, another massive stunt that would look and feel very impressive for a brief period of time, but which would leave us with little tangible results. It certainly would not have opened up space to any meaningful degree to smaller firms.

The fundamental question is, what do we want to do in space? Do we want to win a race or open up a frontier?

And it may be a "smart move" as you say in an era where the economy is faultering and we need to cut back on government spending, but in light of obama's gargatuan and irresponsible ballooning deficits, shaving a few billion from NASA is ridiculous. And redirecting NASA to become a global warming research agency is just plain stupid.

Earth Sciences are exactly what NASA is all about. Another step in the right direction.

 

[frodo1008]

Besides Manny, another area that could very well receive more funding from NASA would be solar observation, which may just prove that the main changes to the atmosphere are occurring because of sun activity and are not human induced after all!

And the main problem with that would mean that we as human beings would have absolutely no control over Global Climate Change at all! Then the ONLY thing we could do about that would be to find out just what we would have to do about the affects of this type of change, and that would be just as hard (if not harder) than trying to deal with the causes of the problem.

But Manny, as I have pointed out time and again, there are plenty of excellent reasons for reducing rather drastically our dependence on fossil fuels without even considering Global Climate Change anyway!

Of course, in the long run Bigelow Aerospace does want to see space hotels build in near earth space, and I think that is an excellent idea also for a way stop for craft going further out to the moon and beyond! In fact, I started an entire series of threads on this very subject some time ago!

And Manny, if you read the lead article for opening up space.com at this point all of the pure private alt.space types are ecstatic over president Obama's plans to get them on board!

Perhaps we are both wrong here, and should just shut up with the criticism of this particular aspect of the current administrations plans. Heck, let us just sit back and see just what these people can do with the actual help of NASA!

And in turn maybe, just maybe, they will not only be successful, but at the same time bring back the envy of the world for what we in the US are doing in space! To say nothing of the likes of spacex being able to bring back the commercial satellite launch business to this country that we have lost!

Just perhaps.....

I am willing to be convinced, how about you?

 

[space_tycoon]

Frodo, is there some way I could convince you to use fewer exclamation points?

Just a minor request...

 

[frodo1008]

Sorry, but this is an area where I do get somewhat upset. So, I use exclamation points to emphasize that situation!

(1) Of course, my first choice would be to have NASA get enough money (it is such a relatively tiny amount anyway) that they can both greatly increase help to the pure private interests, and still go on to the moon and eventually Mars, but that choice does not seem to be in the cards at this time. I always get a kick out of things when the budget hawks go adter EXACTLY the wrong things.

(2) If that can not be, then at least have the money that NASA would spend go into helping the private interests with truly getting Cheap Access To Space (CATS) going full steam.

(3) At the very least choice (2) should get back to choice (1), if it eventually turns out that the private interests are no better at doing these things than NASA would be alone anyway. We should know by the end of this administration if that is true or not (by 2012 spacex at least should have demonstrated how safe and reliable they can make the Falcon 9 series, and be well on their way to converting at least some of the Dragon Capsules to carrying astronauts instead of just materials to the ISS), especially if this administration keeps dropping the ball on the greatest problem facing America: that is unemployment.

Heck, it might even be better if a thoroughly chastised Republican party (remember that the perception of the American public in 2007 was that the recession was their fault originally, and that is why we now have the Democrats in control) got back in power, and as a result HAD to pay attention to Main Street instead of Wall Street for a change!

I do also get a kick out of it when the alt.space people claim that they will be hiring some 5,000 more people as a result of this. Just how many people would that be a net result in, as NASA and its other contractors will now probably be laying off more than 10,000 people in the mean time. Do they mean some 5,000 people MORE than NASA would be laying off, or what?

Quite frankly, I despair of ever seeing a 5% unemployment rate again in this country, regardless of just what the federal government does or does not do, and that one I will put an exclamation point to!

OK?

 

[jimglenn]

Why does the Falcon 9 need 9 engines in the first stage? Or do I have it wrong? Sounds like that crazy N1 moon

rocket that kept blowing up. I think one big rocket motor is the way to go. Can't he buy some surplus shuttle engines?

Should be cheap these days. Or Obama could order nasa to give him a few!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[dragon04]

I always get a kick out of things when the budget hawks go after EXACTLY the wrong things

The President is a "budget hawk"? Hmm.

Heck, it might even be better if a thoroughly chastised Republican party (remember that the perception of the American public in 2007 was that the recession was their fault originally, and that is why we now have the Democrats in control) got back in power, and as a result HAD to pay attention to Main Street instead of Wall Street for a change!

It appears that you twisting this into another "Blame The Republicans" issue? Oh. Wait. Your President does that, still as well. President Obama and the Democrats are responsible for this. It's His/their decision to save $100 Billion. Well, actually about $90 Billion as about $10 Billion has already been spent. Perhaps if the President wasn't spending another $3.83 TRILLION this year (and obviously planning to spend far more during his term), there might BE a hundred billion bones laying around to launch Apollo 18 with.

I do also get a kick out of it when the alt.space people claim that they will be hiring some 5,000 more people as a result of this. Just how many people would that be a net result in, as NASA and its other contractors will now probably be laying off more than 10,000 people in the mean time. Do they mean some 5,000 people MORE than NASA would be laying off, or what?

I don't think we need manned space flight to be a taxpayer-funded jobs program. If we're going to spend $100 Billion on make-work, there are TONS of terrestrial projects that need done and fixes that need to be made. And they would actually employ millions instead of thousands over the next 20 years.

 

[vladdrac]

To a homeless person one of those Japanese MicroHotel Cubbies would seem like Paradise....

 

[ZenGalacticore]

To a homeless person one of those Japanese MicroHotel Cubbies would seem like Paradise....

And they look damn near bomb and earthquake-proof!

(I'd make the interior of mine look sort of like the inside of a padded-converted hippy van.)

 

[frodo1008]

Dragon04, I really do not want to get into another drag our battle with you here, but for the sake of others, I will point out just where you have placed more into my remarks than is there.

For instance, I am fully aware that the president is not at this time a "budget hawk", just how could he be and be perceived as being a president that cares about the economy at all?

And even at that, it is Congress that I was referring to. They will have the final say in any cuts to NASA, and just exactly what NASA is going to be doing with the funding that they do provide. It is there that the "budget Hawks" will probably do the wrong thing, as they usually do when it comes to NASA. I am not trying to turn this into another anti president Obama diatribe here!

And when I referred to the Republicans I stated that it was the "perceived" viewpoint with the American voting public that they were responsible for the current recession, and that is why they lost power to the Democrats in the first place. You do understand what the word "perceived" means, don't you? And now it may very well be the Democrats turn. But hopefully if the Republicans get back into power (or at least gain enough be a viable party in Congress), they will have learned a lesson, that it IS jobs that the greater majority of the American public are concerned about, and act accordingly!

Finally, when I referred to NASA as a jobs program, I was only following what some here have already said (and probably will be saying again), and that IS certainly not the only reason why NASA should be fully funded at a far better rate than it is now. But to the average Congress person, it IS an important factor in such funding, and whether you (or I for that matter) agree with that or not does not matter at all!

And history will tell out, will it not? Back, in the 1960's when we had a far more vibrant space program, for only about 4 times as much as NASA's minuscule budget is now ( at least as a percent of the federal budget), this country had a far greater manufacturing base than it now has. This in turn, resulted in a far greater middle class in that era than we have now also, for every NASA or NASA contractor middle class job, there were at least three jobs also available in the pure private sector, either as sub contractors in manufacturing, or as support for those directly employed by such. That would mean for the 400,000 jobs directly attributed to NASA (especially with the Apollo program, but that was not the only NASA program at all) or its direct contractors, there were another 1,200,000 other jobs directly influenced, for a total of some 1,600,000 jobs here in America and not shipped over seas!

Now, if we were to do the same today (giving NASA 2% of the federal budget) this would result in some 6,400,000 American jobs for only an investment of some 2% of the federal budget! As I have said, and some here might just even back me up here, NASA is NOT an expense of the federal government it IS and INVESTMENT by that very government, not only in the present, but just as importantly through the technology developed, for the future also!! Thus for a relatively small investment in the federal budget, unemployment (especially in the hardest hit sector of our economy in manufacturing) could be truly reduced by an appreciable amount.

Now, if the federal government could match this with similar investments in such needed areas as the infrastructure of this county for about 10% of the federal budget, then the unemployment in this country could be practically eliminated. And employed people in good wages and benefits middle class jobs not only pay far more taxes, they are no longer on such federal monetary drains as unemployment insurance!

Would an enlightened Congress on both sides of the political spectrum do this?

I would hope so, but I am certainly not going to hold my breath over such enlightenment by our elected representatives, are you?

Have I cleared up some points of my former post?

 

[jimglenn]

Re: Obama aims to hire mo' saltines.

You admit it is a jobs program, but should be expanded? You don't say what kind of jobs program.

From what I have seen, not too many jobs are created. And what do they do? Spend a lot of money,
that never comes back to the community. It is all up in space. That is the problem.

THEY SHOULD BUILD AN EARTHBASE. So you could just walk to it. Maybe simulate being in space.



Every year, the financial projections get worse for NASA and the ISS. Since its inception in 1984, the ISS has suffered huge cost overruns and delays. The mission has been reduced and downsized on several occasions, increasing its cost and reducing its capacities. The Government Accounting Office (GAO) noted in September 1997 and again in January 1999 that cost and schedule performances of the station's prime contractor continue to deteriorate. In May 1998, GAO reported the ISS was to be completed in December 2003. Just seven months later, GAO reported that date had been pushed back to July 2004. The January 1999 report stated that the cost overruns for the completion of the project had skyrocketed to more than $780 million. Russia's commitment problems are also steering the ISS toward a path of fiscal failure. The final price tag for development, assembly and deployment of ISS is now estimated to be $96 billion.

In its current incarnation, ISS is billed as a tool for international space cooperation. However, Canada was forced to withdraw for economic reasons, and Russia's shaky economy and unstable political atmosphere cast serious doubts on its ability to stay in the program. Members of the scientific community have also questioned the potential benefits of ISS, in light of its high cost. By eliminating the space station, taxpayers would save almost $10 billion over five years.

http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageSer ... olicy_NASA