Obama signed NASA bill 11 October 2010!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

neutrino78x

Guest
No replies on this thread??? You guys who like Constellation won't admit that New Space is superior??? :)
 
P

planetling

Guest
The budget authorization now must go through the appropriations process, which Nelson warned is "going to be a tough session because of the need to cut back on spending with regard to the federal deficit."

...

The Obama administration agreed with the broad outlines of the flexible path architecture and while it approved a modest increase in NASA's budget, it fell far short of what the Augustine panel said would be needed. The initial budget proposal deferred development of a new heavy lift rocket and set no timetable for deep space exploration.

"Probably the main thing the Augustine committee found was that the path NASA was on was not sustainable," said Sally Ride, a former shuttle astronaut and a member of the panel. "We are all excited about the new path, more of an emphasis on technologies, more of an emphasis on commercial capabilities done in the right way and with a focus on mission assurance and a good human-rating process. That would help free NASA to do the more exciting and challenging things we all believe NASA can and should be doing, getting astronauts beyond low-Earth orbit. ... In that regard, this bill is a very good step forward.


But, she warned, "the 600-pound gorilla here is the U.S. economy and the need for fiscal responsibility across all agencies."

...

Critics have charged that the budget does not adequately fund the new super rocket and that it will not fly by 2016 as promised without additional funding.

While there are some good things that are in this bill, I still hold reservation. The problem that I see still comes down to funding. This, like [Bush's] Constellation, could also be changed at any time by any future administration. Beside funding, there are still NO established time lines, which are critical for any successful project. The goal might be there, but so is my goal of hitting the megamillions lottery by 2016.
 
N

neutrino78x

Guest
planetling":29np6olk said:
While there are some good things that are in this bill, I still hold reservation. The problem that I see still comes down to funding. This, like [Bush's] Constellation, could also be changed at any time by any future administration. Beside funding, there are still NO established time lines, which are critical for any successful project. The goal might be there, but so is my goal of hitting the megamillions lottery by 2016.
I think the real goal is to accelerate New Space. Once we get an infrastructure in LEO, we can think about some of these more interesting targets.

I advocate going to Mars, but I only want to go there if the ultimate goal is to set up a colony. If we just want science, we can send probes to get scientific data.

The thing is, right now we don't have a way to send, say, 500 colonists to Mars. You could probably do it (over time) with that Mars Cycler concept, but again, building that requires a system of regular space launches to assemble it in space.

So, the key thing is to get New Space accelerated, and get them going, establishing a commercial presence in space that is self sustaining and independent of government.

--Brian
 
N

neutrino78x

Guest
Plus the President does have a timetable. Asteroid in 2025, Mars sometime in the 2030s, just like Bush, except asteroid instead of Moon.

--Brian
 
P

planetling

Guest
neutrino78x":ipde5avy said:
I think the real goal is to accelerate New Space. Once we get an infrastructure in LEO, we can think about some of these more interesting targets.

I advocate going to Mars, but I only want to go there if the ultimate goal is to set up a colony. If we just want science, we can send probes to get scientific data.

The thing is, right now we don't have a way to send, say, 500 colonists to Mars. You could probably do it (over time) with that Mars Cycler concept, but again, building that requires a system of regular space launches to assemble it in space.

So, the key thing is to get New Space accelerated, and get them going, establishing a commercial presence in space that is self sustaining and independent of government.

--Brian
These are some of the things that I am truly excited about. The goal is there, I am happy that Obama's goal is similar to that of mine, selfishly speaking. Sending colonist to Mars or any other destination is not at the top of my wishlist, realistically this is something that will take much more planning not in our lifetime. But to have human presence on another world capable of in-depth scientific research will be the beginning of a new era, which is doable during my lifetime!

Yes, get New Space accelerated. Over time, maybe private industry will help pick up the slack (+ lower cost options) for our government(s) to venture on to Europa and other incredible destinations. Probes can only do so much. Sending man to these other worlds will also benefit us in so many other ways, including job growth.
 
N

neutrino78x

Guest
I definitely think we need a probe to Europa, one that can drop a little robotic submarine into the ocean there. It needs to have sonar, because any life down there most likely would use sound to communicate. I have personally heard whales on sonar at ranges of like 10 miles (I was a sonar tech (operator) on submarines in the Navy), you're never going to see that far with visual sensors. :)

--Brian
 
Y

Yuri_Armstrong

Guest
neutrino, it's not the government's responsibilty to set up a Mars colony. What I would like to see is a long term Martian base with a crew of 4-6 (but likely 4) astronauts solving the mysteries that await us on Mars, and have the crew rotated out every 500 days or so, similar to the ISS. We could use a Mars cycler ship that constantly travelled between Earth and Mars but never actually landed, vehicles would simply attach to it. Eventually, some companies may decide they want to set up a presence on Mars and hopefully some form of colonization will begin. The government may assist them in this endeavour similar to Obama's plan to help LEO commercilization. But the main goal should be SCIENCE and EXPLORATION, the colonies can and should come later.

Also, why was the Mars goal set for sometime in the 2030's? Why not before 2030? Did they just arbitraily decide to put a 10 year gap between the asteroid and Mars mission? What was the logic behind that? I say make Mars the top priority, and the asteroid mission can be a side objective for us. I honestly have no idea what is taking so long. I understand we will need at least 10 years to develop the technology, set up the infrastructure, but I think Obama has failed to realize that with every program the clock is ticking. JFK proposed to get us to the moon within 8 years, and by the time we got there Nixon was already tearing up the program. A Mars mission will not become reality until a president announces that great goal and defends it appropriately, we don't want another George Bush 90 day report debacle.
 
P

planetling

Guest
Yuri_Armstrong":123vdmty said:
Also, why was the Mars goal set for sometime in the 2030's? Why not before 2030? Did they just arbitraily decide to put a 10 year gap between the asteroid and Mars mission? What was the logic behind that? I say make Mars the top priority, and the asteroid mission can be a side objective for us. I honestly have no idea what is taking so long. I understand we will need at least 10 years to develop the technology, set up the infrastructure, but I think Obama has failed to realize that with every program the clock is ticking. JFK proposed to get us to the moon within 8 years, and by the time we got there Nixon was already tearing up the program. A Mars mission will not become reality until a president announces that great goal and defends it appropriately, we don't want another George Bush 90 day report debacle.

Exactly.

And whatever opinions others may have about the present course, this much is true: Without a serious and specific plan, serious and specific funding, and serious and specific dates, the goal seriously cannot be realized.

That is why, as a taxpayer, I am not completely happy with the current bill.
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
neutrino78x":3niut8rx said:
I am surprised there is not a thread for this already.

11 October 2010: President Obama signed the NASA authorization bill into law, Constellation officially canceled.

The goal is to go to Mars by Flexible Path. Orion will be retained for deep space missions, but Ares I and V are gone.

Which is what Obama's original plan was (with the exception of keeping Orion), and how it should be. :)

--Brian (voted for Obama, still supports him and his space plan)
It's one of a half dozen threads on the same topic. What you you expect...especially with a few dozen exclamation points after the title?
 
N

neutrino78x

Guest
Well you don't need to send humans for exploration. Humans are for colonization. :)

--Brian
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts