POLL: Is Abandoning NASA's Moon Plan the Right Choice?

[IronBob]

This poll is no where near as ridiculous as the man who is responsible for it. The cancellation of Constellation is just another example of a rank idealogue who presents us nothing but sentiment over substance. While some of you crow on about how private enterprise will take up the slack, your beloved President plans to spend the next three years or more tearing down those very businesses with mind-numbing tax increases and when all is said and done we'll have spent more money and received less for it then any time in our history. You can take this to the bank, business never forgets who has screwed them and this will be no exception.

What is even more appalling is the ignorance of some of you who do not have an utter clue how bidding on technological programs actually works. Bidding on such things has always been "best case", in other words the bidding has to do with the actual best guess for completing different phases of the project and does not include any money for errors or engineering surprises that every highly technical program like this has because you cannot line item something you don't know is going to happen. In effect, when you cry about overruns without looking at what they overruns were for and what they solved, then you truly are ignorant about the process.

If you want to do us a BIG favor, turn the maintenance and security of the ISS over to private enterprise and stop screwing us with that useless venture. With that, the President's plan is for the US to actually do NOTHING where space and technology is concerned which shows us just how far his own ineptitude can lead us.

Orion especially had the opportunity of bringing us a whole new set of technologies and inventiveness just on crew safety alone that could have had the potential to touch airline industry. But of course, who cares right. Let's just flip all that money to the teacher's union except there's one problem. There won't be any reason to study anything related to space travel with the current buffoon we have in office.

 

[nimbus]

In effect, when you cry about overruns without looking at what they overruns were for and what they solved, then you truly are ignorant about the process.

Who are you talking to?

the President's plan is for the US to actually do NOTHING where space and technology is concerned which shows us just how far his own ineptitude can lead us.

Supporting evidence? The 'nothing in space/tech' bit, not the political trash talk.

 

[IronBob]

In effect, when you cry about overruns without looking at what they overruns were for and what they solved, then you truly are ignorant about the process.

Who are you talking to?
Read the forums and figure it out.

the President's plan is for the US to actually do NOTHING where space and technology is concerned which shows us just how far his own ineptitude can lead us.

Supporting evidence? The 'nothing in space/tech' bit, not the political trash talk.

Political trash talk? Sorry pal, but if reality hurts that much, perhaps you should stop reading.

With that, NO, actually you present us with evidence that there is a complimentary replacement for Constellation. Just blathering on about private enterprise doesn't cut it. Who exactly is he referring to? He's not pointed to one single aeronautics company to fill this void because quite frankly they don't exist.

 

[IronBob]

How can there be 2065 votes, when there has been 247 views of this topic? :lol:

Because you can take the poll without reading the text of the story. Most people are probably in shock that we have such a technologically ignorant President and just haven't had the heart to read on.

 

[EarthlingX]

Before this thread finishes in Politics, perhaps this thread here might be able to help you find some facts.
List of Multiple Threads on the Same Topic

 

[nimbus]

Sorry pal, but

But this thread is going to Politics if you keep blathering on political.

With that, NO, actually you present us with evidence that there is a complimentary replacement for Constellation. Just blathering on about private enterprise doesn't cut it. Who exactly is he referring to? He's not pointed to one single aeronautics company to fill this void because quite frankly they don't exist.

Ahem.. SpaceX launchers? Bigelow habitats? Flagsuit suits and accessories? Armadillo LEO lifters and Scaled airlaunch? Not to mention the same companies that contributed in major part in past projects like... for example... Saturn V launcher (Boeing) ? All American companies and likely will result in astronauts getting back in space sooner than the Constellation gap would have allowed.
Who cares if he points em out or not? That's who will do it if they get a chance. The quicker govt gives up the reins to private industry, the better. The less government involvement the better.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Actually, I am excising purely politcal posts to a giant stew pot where they can ferment, and will eventually wind up on their own in politics. I'm trying my best to save the more on topic posts in the discussion.

 

[dalekay]

Comical in intent but may have some grains of truth in it.
The current administration is well, liberal. Liberal minds could not work, live or tolerate space. So man space flight is far far in a mind set galaxy away from them. To live in space, work in space and do space things, you would have to be conservative. Your resources to live are limited and you better be frugal if you want to live.

Not so comical.
Science and politics should not mix. It would be far wiser for mankind to get their collective asses in gear and move off this rock before a rock does come smashing in to break up the party. How can a species that is so intelligent be so fuc..ng dumb?

Dale

 

[ayman31]

Voted Yes because I feel that it was inspired somehow by the Bush administration. The administration had no intent on ensuring that this gets funding and that we can REALLY land on the moon. They just do it for votes and because they don't appreciate the expenses. Bush might like space travel, but he doesn't realize what's involved. Just like Bush Senior (space station Freedom) he must have been on another planet because I don't think he was on this one.

Fact is, and no one really wants to admit, but space travel is too expensive for manned missions. It's tremendously wasteful. We should be putting our money into propulsion research, not some fancy "return to the moon" BS.

I'd like to see private industry participate in the space program on a much greater scale. Once commercial interests have built enough stake in it then it won't be so susceptible to the changing political climate in our white house.

(it will also have access to a much larger pool of cash from which to grow)

 

[ayman31]

Even though I work for an Aerospace company that will be severly impacted by the cancellation of Constellation, inspiring commercial ventures to LEO and beyond is a necessary part of any national space plan. I may be wrong, but I think my company will find a way to apply the synergy of effort already expended during Ares development, into another commercial launch option. While the Obama budget is distasteful to all who have worked toward a moon return in 2020, it is folly to depend upon the government, NASA or any other agency, to do what entreprenuers in the USA have been doing throughout the history of our great republic. They will do what the government can't and they will succeed where the heart and will of our politicians fail.I too, would like to have seen NASA's plans for a moon return fully funded, but the reality of the current economy pushes that dream out for now, but it reinforces what we all know... real spacefaring begins when there is a business incentive to drive it. A parallel can be drawn between commercial aviation and commercial spaceflight. In the early 20th century, commercial aviation didn't exist and wouldn't today except that the government invested in the infrastructure (ie.. airports, air traffic control etc..) that allowed commercial aviation to succeed. So we can cry about the government getting out of the rocket building business, but I say move over NASA and give the commercial guys a chance. Obama can make it profitable for the commercial space business and we will find that there will be lots of money and incentive to go to the Moon, Mars, or any other space goal.

Agree. But as in any commercial enterprise, it's a cutthroat kind of thing. Businesses don't play fair. So ... we may end up with rich people owning space alongside military interests. We might see some conflicts over who owns what. On the other hand, the innovation that's inspired by this will trickle down to the common man. But, as we can see from history, it trickles down very slowly and can create vast gaps between haves and have nots. Still, we will see more innovation this way, no doubt. It's just a matter of who can enjoy that innovation. We can't stop people from being greedy. May as well learn to live with the disparity.

As long as the space program is so government dominated, we all have to move at their pace. It's a tradeoff.

 

[ncwolfie]

Sad times indeed are ahead for NASA.
Obama and Bolden are absolutely clueless about the damage they are willing to incur to space exploration and manned space flight. Never thought I would see the worlds premier space program become a mere shadow of its former greatness. :roll:

 

[SciFi2010]

I don’t think the mission to the moon or mars is dead, but a delay is necessary to benefit from economic reforms and major technological breakthroughs in order to design an affordable space colonization program. What America needs now is a long-term plan for the 21st century that incorporates a short-term and long term vision about the possible futures of this country and the world to set priorities. In the short term our first and major priority is to save this economy for the long term. America should not spend its way out, but should lend its way out of the recession. If the major banks are still not willing to lend sufficiently to healthy companies then the American government should intervene. (That is probably one of the reasons why the unemployment is still at 10%). Limited (or no) bonuses should be paid to personnel and no dividend should be paid to stock-holders for at least 4 years to increase the liquidity of banks involved in the financial crisis. If this is a reason for personnel to leave, they should (There are more then enough unemployed academics who want their jobs). America needs more local banks not enlisted on the share-market with banking directors who earn less than 200,000 $ and receive no bonus (like Ben Bernanke). Banking directors are less tempted by short term profits with a high risk if there's no reward. The availability of liquidity for healthy companies and the savings of account holders are then “secured” even with financial turmoil on Wall Street. These kinds of banks can lead to more local investments, business and jobs, while large international investment can be done by investment banks that are still able to attract capital from the stock markets. The government should lend its money and cut its expenditures at the same time by spending efficiently on bureaucracy, defence, social security, etc… Several ways to cut spending is more computerization, fuel-efficiency (especially defence), cut unnecessary subsidies and lower wages or fire unnecessary personnel (very unpopular). A gradual military retreat from the Middle-East will be cost-saving, but tricky. If we do not select and train enough reliable local police personnel and build up a local economy in these countries it might blow up in our faces. The second priority is to make an inventory of all goods and services made in America that can compete in the international arena. We should provide those companies with enough credit and if necessary research facilities (for example nano-technology→ solar- and battery-industry→ computer-and robot-industry→ the aeroplane- and space-industry). If we solve the economic crisis, the budget-deficit and create affordable LEO launches and spacestations with good policy and research, we could design a total new moon and mars colonization program based on new LEO aerospace technology, infrastructure and economics. A moon-mission would be for example far more energy-efficient if we design 2 separate “space-ferries”:
1.A “space-ferry” between earth and a LEO station, which could for example be a supersonic flying wing carrying Spaceship(X?) with (airbreathing/non-breathing) SABRE rockets. The launch-costs would be reduced by more simple technology, logistics, infrastructure and fuel-efficiency (airlift, decreased air-resistance, airbreathing, and air-pressure compensation).
2. A “space-ferry” between a LEO station and the moon could be fuelled on the moon or on the LEO station. In the mean time we could set aside long-term investments for fundamental new propulsions. (Like VASIMR and nuclear technology for interplanetary missions).

 

[Piratejoe]

To the people that are "shocked" that a space website's users are mostly against Obama's plans please read up on the opinion's on CNN and Fox News on this subject. People are upset all around, persnonally Ive already written my congressman stating my opinion on the subject and that I will not vote for any of my local polititians that agree with Mr. Obama.

 

[asj2010]

Ok... maybe I'm being harsh here, but cmon! We went from nothing to the moon in less than a decade back in the middle of the last century and now we can't RE-DO this in twice the time and billions upon billions of dollars? Let the commercial sector have a crack at it. If there's money to be made, then this will drive us to the stars faster than anything that a government run agency can. Who knows maybe unobtanium will be found on Mars!

haha...that's because no one probably actually landed on the moon then ;-)

btw, if anyone seriously thinks private industry will be able to do serious space exploration, they are SERIOUSLY mistaken. the profits from space exploration are just too long term for any private company UNLESS the government finances it.

 

[nimbus]

Space access is private space's focal development issue. Exploration will be once orbital access is made routine enough.

 

[Xplaner]

Canceling the manned mission to the moon is a really stupid thing to do, no matter how you look at it. Perhaps some were not happy with the original project plan, but frankly speaking, there are big reasons supporting the decision to go to the moon. First and foremost, the ITER project in France expects to have a commercially operational fusion reactor providing power to residential and business customers by 2016; a fusion reactor that runs on fuel that is rare on Earth and abundant on the moon. It seems that either this administration would prefer to purchase fusion fuel from India, China and Russia in a relationship remarkably similar to our dependence on the middle east for oil, or perhaps they just don't read much in the way of science. Second, a space station is nice (it was nice back in the 70's too), as are unmanned probes, but why are we going up there if there's no place to go to? I mean, get real! Getting to Europe from New York City faster is nice, but the purpose of manned spaceflight is to go into space, not LEO and back down. It's downright short-sighted. Lastly, those who remember the Apollo mission, or those who studied them know that it is people, going into space and doing things human beings have never done before that drives the next generation. Just about everyone I have worked with in the aerospace sector that is in that age bracket has said Neal Armstrong walking on the moon is what inspired them to become scientists and engineers. Note that it wasn't the sixth guy to fly into LEO. And as for letting private manned spaceflight take the helm, remember that businesses are only driven by profitability and are risk averse, thus, they can only be depended on to take us into space with the maximum of the former and the minimum of the latter. So let's all get ready to cram into tiny seats that don't lean back more than half a degree, with the only difference being that we pay a lot more and fly a lot higher. Thanks, Obama.

 

[daztek]

There's no point pursuing massively expensive heavy-lift, moon-colonising goals if they're unfunded. Presidents and congresses won't foot the bill, its as simple as that. And the budget outlook means there's not much extra government funding for years into the future.

I'm a supporter of the public sector but being realistic the only way we'll get ahead is when space makes a profit that can be reinvested in a self-sustaining industry - commercial spaceflight and orbital infrastructure is the only way to go. It's also the best way to steal a march on the Chinese, and less so, the Indians.

Good decision, in my book.

 

[Astrocowboy1939]

This is NOT a smart move, and wasted 5 years of NASA funding! The technology is NOT 1960s, but incorporates much learned in the space shuttle program and the hardware developed.
This is purely a political move to divorce any progress made by the previous administration from the present regime in D.C. The Constellation program was not ill-advised, but was evolutionary from what we have learned over the past 40 years.
If Congress has any *alls at all, they will send Obama another message--continue the existing program until it completes and start new funding in parallel for the investigative studies that would possibly validate the need for change in direction. Don't throw out the baby and the bath water.
The NASA budget is miniscule by camparison to most other programs--foreign aid and the defense budgets.
Again, penny-wise and pound foolish.

 

[Admiral_Lagrange]

I think we'll be back on the Moon a lot faster and cheaper. There's a lot of problems with the Bush plan.

The most read is of course the old "been there, done that".

Then there's the Ares. That could be a topic in itself. Has anyone asked "why was the Ares chosen ?"
The solid rocket fuel booster has killed more people than the rest of all Space exploration put together.

We have many companies who want access to space so they can conduct their experiments and develop new products.
The Bush plan leaves them totally out.

We have the tech to go from Earth to LEO and from Earth to point C. But surprisingly we can't go from point B to C.

When Nasa blazes a trail into space, then people should be able to follow. The contracts provides us with that ability.
The new plan gives us the vehicles to go to LEO and beyond. It gives us the needed tools to go from point B to C.
It saves the struggling new companies and peoples jobs, and at the same time creates new jobs. It gives us the ability to create a research and logistics center that will take us anywhere in the Solar system.

How is a company going to build a Solar power plant in space without a logistics center to deliver their supplys. With the Ares ?
There's an org that wants to build a colony. Several mining companies wanting to check out mining on the moon. Pharma companies are licking the chops. The ability to create totally homogeneous mixtures without the influence of gravity could yield unknown quantities of new materials.

Want to explore the moon ? Buy a Bigelow Module and Lagrange Logistics will drop ship it for you. This plan puts People to work and People in Space.

NASA should be taking off from point C and going to where no man has gone before.

I still need another 50,000 people for this grass roots movement into space. If you want to help just PM me.

 

[Kanawha]

Well folks, this is happening whether we like it or not. So grab a beer, kick back, and lets watch the stagnation of the human race continue. Hopefully a good asteroid will wipe out the evidence of our squandered ingenuity and resources, otherwise I'm gonna be embarrassed to face the technologically superior beings that will eventually land here and laugh in our faces because we are so primitive and lazy. Too harsh, America?

 

[menellom]

Yeah, that's not being melodramatic at all. :roll:

 

[Kanawha]

Point well received, then. Seriously though, speaking from the historian's perspective, what will the next generation have to inspire them? Survey says: Two decent mars rovers followed by NOTHING.

 

[TC_sc]

I'm sad to say I predicted this in another thread. It's been clear that Obama wasn't behind NASA and has hinted at such actions. He said that he is ending NASA's manned space program. Even if we vote this man out of office, it will be hard, and expensive, to rebuild this program. In Obama's plan, NASA will just become an extension of the UN or the ESA. We can only hope that congress stops this foolishness.

This is a sad day in America.

I wonder how much China is going to charge us for the He3 on the moon?

 

[jdf]

I agree! Terrible wording of questions. Although I do not believe Constellation program was a boondoggle and I fully support human space travel, the Constellation program was not the best plan for NASA. Former President Kennedy set mankind's goal of reaching the nearest planetary body, the Moon, and we achieved that. The Moon no longer inspires the way it once did. Setting sights now for Solar System exploration is absolutely the way to go. However, even the rosiest analysis shows serious technological shortcomings at this time to begin that next exploration step regarding radiation shielding, human habitation above or below ground selection and the time required to explore beyond the Moon. Budgetary restrictions will intensify, not decrease and the Obama budget is painfully aware of that so objectives are set to be more achievable within likely budgets. How we can continue sending more rovers as we improve the technology to move back to human exploration at the right time for the more mind lifting destinations while private enterprise can fill in the space on that already achieved that only requires consolidation and improvement without monster public funding to do that.

 

[JPR]

I'm all for promoting commercial space flight. However ending the nation's only manned access to space (Space Shuttle) with no real timeline for replacement is a huge mistake. We are essentially counting our chickens before they hatch. If we are really going to cancel Constellation, then continue the Space Shuttle until an alternative is ready to fly!

2nd, canceling the Lunar program and going to the 'flexible path' is also a huge mistake. What this really says is we plan to go 'somewhere' but we don't know where, no goals set, no time lines, no direct aspirations. I fear we will end up spending the next two decades studying where we should go and not actually go anywhere. If we have no definable goals then we will achieve nothing!!

So for the foreseeable future we will be laying off 10k plus at KSC, around 6k at JSC, and who knows how many related jobs will be lost and we will continue to pay the Russians absurd amounts of money to fly our astronauts to the ISS. How much do you want to bet the price of flying on the Soyuz to ISS goes WAY up when they are the only game in town?

If you look at the budget it tells all; Obama does not support manned space flight. Yes NASA is getting a budget increase, but it mostly for unmanned robotic missions and Earth observation satellites.

I pray Congress is wiser and refuses Obama's plans.