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

[CosmicAudioChic]

Okay, so let me get this straight...we spent around 100 billion dollars on the ISS and if we want to go there we are going to have to call the Russians for a ride. The one thing American's could be 'proud of' over the last fifty years has been our space program and we just flush it all down the toilet while China goes to the Moon.

Congress...please, do not let this happen

 

[Busterb1959]

If NASA had been given more money a few years earlier, Constellation could have already been on a launchpad, helping the shuttle complete it's final missions, and noone would have said a word about it's value as a launch system. When shuttle was on the drawing board, we were still landing men on the moon. Constellation never had a chance.
I am all for the private sector reaching out into space, but I have my reservations. The shuttle could put HUGE payloads into orbit. It's gonna take the private sector a long, long time before they are able to do the same thing.
I propose we do not forget our other launch systems, like Atlas and Delta. A Delta "heavy" could be easily modified to carry on the Constellation program, perhaps using some concepts from the proposed Jupiter study. Sure, Delta is not "human" certified...yet. Hmm, a launch system that already exists, including launch facilities, support, spare parts and a trained staff.......CMON!!
Delta's are as close as we have right now to replacing the shuttle's capabilities. It's funny, Delta has not been mentioned in any of these posts?

 

[menellom]

It's gonna take the private sector a long, long time before they are able to do the same thing

Don't count out the private industry just yet. Keep in mind we're not talking about investing in a bunch of napkin sketches. Most of the companies being invested in either have rockets undergoing testing or that are in the development/construction phase. For example, SpaceX's Falcon 9 is for all practical purposes done, it's sitting on a launch pad at KSC as we speak (er, type) waiting to launch. The heavy variant of the Falcon 9 will only require the addition of two (already designed and constructed) boosters to lift 30,000 kg to LEO... that's 5000 more than Ares I was ever expected to carry.

 

[neutrino78x]

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?

 

[nimbus]

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[...] Thanks, Obama.

What?

and start new funding in parallel for the investigative studies that would possibly validate the need for change in direction.

C.f. Augustine Panel.

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?

Ridiculously biased assessment. NASA an extension of the UN or ESA? Yeah, it'll be really hard and expensive to rebuild something overpriced and behind schedule like Constellation's Ares rockets. Especially if there really will have been years of enabling tech research, like life support.

Okay, so let me get this straight...we spent around 100 billion dollars on the ISS and if we want to go there we are going to have to call the Russians for a ride. The one thing American's could be 'proud of' over the last fifty years has been our space program and we just flush it all down the toilet while China goes to the Moon.

Congress...please, do not let this happen

That was part of Constellation's plan already. Private launchers could be ready before Constellation would have been.

 

[EarthlingX]

For those, who don't only write, but also read:
So what's wrong with Ares/Constellation

ULA's EELV alternative plans (DTAL, tankers & archetecture)

And more in
List of Multiple Threads on the Same Topic
and in
Politics

Enjoy

 

[Busterb1959]

The heavy variant of the Falcon 9 will only require the addition of two (already designed and constructed) boosters to lift 30,000 kg to LEO... that's 5000 more than Ares I was ever expected to carry.

I was actually thinking of the proposed Ares V launcher, which would have launched just about anything. Unfortunately, that's not gonna happen, but it would have been glorious.
The Saturn V still stikes awe in my soul, and the Ares V would have been even more awe inspiring. Imagine if the Russian N-1 had worked? Imagine if the Saturn program would have continued? How large and powerful would rockets be now if we had continued these programs?
Take note, a Delta heavy launched a probe to Pluto a while back, and not that long ago. It's already half way there. It's the fastest man-made object ever. Big rockets produce big speeds, and speed is essential when it comes to manned flight. Faster spacecraft use up fewer resouces, and reduce human risk. Until we figure out how to build rockets in space (Yes, we will figure it out eventually), manned flight has to be FAST if we're ever going to go beyond lunar orbit. A "heavy" is in our future if we plan to go to mars.
Buzz Aldrin's book "Magnificent Desolation" has some ingenious insight on how trips to mars could work. None of these ideas work without a "heavy".

 

[pgwater]

I think if the goals are what they say they are then I say hell yes. I think the Bush plan would have resulted in another boots on the ground mission. We know the results of that. To me I dont understand why this has taken so long to re-direct mission of NASA. I mean its not like we just started putting humans into space. The formula has been known. The focus is still on the Moon. NASA focus on the science and private industry focus on the transportation. What is so wrong with that. Maybe if NASA would have followed the proposed goals of the Obama admin years earlier, then maybe we would be discussing going back to the Moon in 2010 but rather going to Mars and beyond.

 

[Busterb1959]

I think if the goals are what they say they are then I say hell yes. I think the Bush plan would have resulted in another boots on the ground mission. We know the results of that.

I wish some of us would think about the exploration of space as a vision of humanity, not a political agenda. Bush had an agenda, but that had nothing to do with the agenda that the Space Programs of the world should have. Obama may have a financial agenda as well, but we all know what will eventually happen. We WILL leave this planet, it's only a matter of time.

 

[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[...] Thanks, Obama.

What?

Wikipedia is a wonderful thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER

However, there is an abundance of information from other sources out there, for those of you who regard Wikipedia with some trepidation.

But really, come on people, do all of you who support cancelling a manned mission to the moon really think the only value is putting a person on the moon? Stop thinking so small, there is more public benefit from each dollar spent on space exploration than social welfare by a large magnitude, and no practical point in a good unmanned mission if we limit manned spaceflight to LEO.

NOTE: this isn't meant to be directly at Nimbus, but rather it is a general comment.

 

[EarthlingX]

But really, come on people, do all of you who support cancelling a manned mission to the moon really think the only value is putting a person on the moon? Stop thinking so small, there is more public benefit from each dollar spent on space exploration than social welfare by a large magnitude, and no practical point in a good unmanned mission if we limit manned spaceflight to LEO.

Take your time, take a look around
Personally, i'm just glad that this boondoggle is almost (3B $ more ) off the table.
They were talking about 1.8 B$ when it started ...

 

[martints3]

Good day, all,
Probably the largest and most expensive drivers of science in the US since WWII have been the "Manhattan" project, the Department of Defense, and NASA. One poster wrote that if we want to let India, China, Japan and Korea (others?) research, develop, design and manufacture all new technologies, we should give up human space flight.
All the while, President Obama bewails the state of education in this country, stating specifically that we need to increase enrollment in science and math classes. I know there are many fields to follow besides space exploration, such as chemistry, physics, biology, geology, among the many other "-ologies." To encourage such an increase in science and math enrollment, there must be challenges that are "exciting" to students. Some students might be excited about space science.
Human space exploration IS ALREADY LIMITED IN SCOPE! To explore space in person, life support is necessary, but it's also incredibly expensive. Taking our time, with an "Earth Space Agency," we could manage a colony or presence on Mars. (Mars is probably the friendliest place we could visit in this Solar System.)
Exploration of space is also limited due to distance: to get to the nearest star (one of the Alpha Centauri pair) would take 4.3 years AT LIGHT SPEED. At the velocity to escape Earth orbit (>17,000 mph?), it would take about 1.695 * 10^6 years to get there. That's 1.659 million years. To the closest stars. Not gonna happen.
The most efficient use of NASA's budget are programmable, robotic machines such as Spirit, Opportunity, the Hubble telescope, Cassini Saturn orbiter, the Kepler observatory, the James Webb telescope and other space based instruments that will soon be in LEO or in use beyond LEO. The Mars Rovers have lasted far beyond their expected lifetimes. What a bargain those 2 rovers are!
So, should we continue manned space flight? I think so, but we have to work within a framework of cooperation among nations. One reason for this cooperation?

Wars are extremely expensive. We are now fighting in 2 places, one of which we probably would have done better to leave alone. But former President Bush went to Congress one day demanding an immediate appropriation of $87,000,000,000 for the war effort. And they APPROVED this amount that same day.

NASA's budget last year was around $15,500,000,000. THEY HAD TO FIGHT FOR 6 MONTHS TO GET THAT! Now, I understand we have to take care of the troops, and since we are already there, we have to do our best to resolve the situation. Compared to the Department of Defense budget, NASA's budget is MINISCULE. (7 tenths of 1 percent of the total federal budget in years past.)
Other than losing the 17 astronauts in the Apollo and Shuttle programs, what other harm has the expenditure of monies by NASA caused this nation? NASA has been a source of inspiration for many, and I include myself.

We need to continue investing in NASA, including NASA encouragement of commercial or private launch research.

I apologize for the length of this "post," but I had to include all of this for perspective.

Thank you,

Tom Martin
martints3@yahoo.com

 

[space_hitchhiker]

So will NASA/USA be caught with their pants down, when India or China start a manned moon programme ?
Where will EADS fit into future space, Ariane isn't enough to keep the EU space industry alive is it?

 

[cwist]

President Obama's move to abandon the Constellation project and an American return to the Moon is a strategic masterstroke. The only people who cared about it were aging Trekkies and the folks who were going to build the hardware.

Come on, people - get real! We've already BEEN to the Moon! Why bother returning? We already know EVERYTHING we need to know about it. It's a DEAD HUNK OF ROCK!

I mean, THINK about it. Returning to the Moon would be as stupid, pointless and wasteful as - well, as having explorers return to America after the first voyage of Columbus!

And speaking of wasted effort - imagine all the lives and money that could have been saved if only President Jefferson had closed the Louisiana Purchase to further exploration and settlement after Lewis & Clark returned safely! Nothing there but worthless empty country full of geysers and grizzly bears.

Seriously, why would ANYONE want to go ba...

...oh...

Point taken?

 

[LowOrbit]

The hyperbole in the questions was obviously tongue-in-cheek, designed to catch readers' attention and get them to vote and join the conversation.
And it is clearly not a scientific poll.
The humorless geeks and conspiracy nuts need to stop taking themselves so seriously.

 

[gravityman]

USA spend 500 billion dollars for year with the army forces if take just 100 billion dollar for year from the army forces and use this money on the space progam in terms of money they could send the man on the moon in just one year! and still have the greatest military force in the world!

But USA still prefer spend all this money in one thing military forces, where i come from this call just one thing PARANOIA

how we could expect from USA send the man back to moon? the first time that the man been send on the moon was because just for win stupid cold war.

now US people like or not what i'm going to say now,your country atack other countries,always live in war times,kill 140000 japanese with nuclear bombs,and after accuse other countries like china that they don't respect the human rights? yeah it's true china don't respect the human right,however they don't atack other countries since the 2 world war and USA don't stop atack other countries since then...

now i ask a question:

how could we expect a country like USA that ever still the 1 world economy,however with so primitive minds, that the use the most part of the country burget for war and governament allow they they citiziens walk on the streets with guns,and always in the war with some country, would do so noble project like send the man on the moon but in this time for peaceful propose this time not for win a cold war,but to explore the natural resources,to save our planet,to save the mankind with new tecnology?

only USA people can change they country if they want and be a powerful spacefaring nation...

but if USA Paranoia worry about with earth problems,and doing war against other countries.The other countries will do better and soon will be the next superpower and spacefaring nation, ever if haven't enough money now but they can be soon be the "1 solar system economy" in the future,this country can be anyone like China,Russia,India...who knows...

 

[TC_sc]

I watch those here that applaud the cancellation of NASA's manned space program. They speak as if one project was canceled and another started. Obama said that in 30 years we might look to do something like a Mars mission. Orion wasn't my choice either, but it's surely a lot better than nothing, and there has been too much invested to drop the project. If anyone thinks that private industry is going to replace NASA anytime soon, you are fooling yourself.

If he is to cancel Orion, at least extend the life of the shuttle and develop a smaller and more modern version, maybe even overhaul 2 of the shuttles. I grew up with the birth of Mercury and watched in awe as a child while man walked on the moon. It sad to see the USA fall to dead last in the space race. Wait, not last, out of the race all together.

 

[srmarti]

So the plan is NASA and the US government doesn't need to have any manned spacecraft of their own anymore?

So how long before the US has a domestic manned capability after the shuttle is retired now?

Even saying been there and done that about the Moon is Naive. Many of the people that accomplished this are retired or even deceased. The newbies will need to develop the skill and experience all over again. Just because Grand dad did it don't mean you can without practice.

:roll:

 

[rcflyer51]

Bye Bye NASA. It was great growing up with you. I remember when gutless Nixon killed Apollo, now our worse than gutless super-duper majority has put your head at the bottom of a slow-motion Guillotine. Please don't cry too much as the blade slowly chops you to death. I am sorry our nation has turned their collective backs on you. It breaks my heart that I will tell my grandchildren of all the great things I saw in my life from NASA and they will not relate because such things don't exist in their life experience. Private space endevours look pretty and have big dreams at first, but they will all fail to transition to the next step of industrial advancement. My grandchildren will miss it all. So sad for us

 

[Spacebeliever]

God knows where all the billions were going in Constellation but both Ares and Orion were pathetically implemented and hugely overpriced. Maybe by funding private industry we can have some actual results. Should you lose hope for American spaceflight, know there is still hope in an International constorium.
www.worldspaceorganization.com

 

[moreandless]

there are dozens of very important robotic missions to run before we even need to plant
flags on mars...the moon only rates as a proving ground for the equipment. Don't be so
hasty in announcing NASA's demise. Constellation lacked vision...a near-sighted burger king
response to a president who said "i want it my way" quick. We've spent a 100 billion on a
space station, yet Congress is only committed to it for the next 10 years? it took 10 friggin
years to build the thing, not counting development time. Nasa is budgeted 5B less now than
when DHUH got his hands on it. This is Nasa's first 'raise' in quite a while.There are important
new propulsion systems in the pipeline.If you want to help Nasa ..please fire your congressmen
all of them,senators too .It's the only thing that Washington GETS.
msfc

 

[nimbus]

Wikipedia is a wonderful thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER

However, there is an abundance of information from other sources out there, for those of you who regard Wikipedia with some trepidation.

But really, come on people, do all of you who support cancelling a manned mission to the moon really think the only value is putting a person on the moon? Stop thinking so small, there is more public benefit from each dollar spent on space exploration than social welfare by a large magnitude, and no practical point in a good unmanned mission if we limit manned spaceflight to LEO.

NOTE: this isn't meant to be directly at Nimbus, but rather it is a general comment.

Commercial fusion from ITER by 2016? Not even close. The research reactor might be done by 2030 if there are no more delays.
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsi ... ience.html
But there likely might never be commercial reactors from ITER. It's only useful as a research physics item.

Thinking small - rushing to the Moon on a shoestring budget only to pack up and go home isn't thinking big. Catalyzing bottom up industry is thinking big. The moon isn't cancelled. Unrealistic moon plans are.

 

[Valcan]

Sending people to the moon is just plain stupid, humans are not made for space travel. Machines are, machines have done more for science than any astronaut did.

Look at Mars, no human has ever been there, but we already have more info about Mars than about the moon. But hey i'm not American, if the Americans just want to waste money on sending humans into space instead of machines just because the president is a black guy, shows they just deserve their country and the poor shape it is in.

:roll:
Hmm this kinda reminds me of something i read once. People who dont have the drive to explore and move outward will cause a break between those who do. Basicaly its like this the whole point of space research to my and many others veiw is to take man there. Not just one or 5 but hundreds, thousands, millions. To be able to make sure if a rogue asteroid hits earth or a super volcano erupts and blankets the planet in ash killing 99% of life and destroying one planet the otherone doesnt have to go down with it. While unmanned craft will always be an intreagle part of the future there needs to be a manned program.

BTW humans also arent made for going to sea, or to fly in plans or to grow crops or almost anything we do. Basicaly that is just a quite frankly stupid way of thinking that belongs in the 1400's.

Oh and i dont really see what our presidents color has to do with it. But then again judging from your name your probably from antwerp which means your a euro. We know how they can be.

 

[neutrino78x]

I don't understand why the majority of people replying to the poll thought canceling Constellation was a bad idea.

Do not most people on this board support the Commercial Space Flight Program, in terms of SpaceX, Orbital et al.? Why continue the moon program, at least, the way it is known today, if we are doing the commercial space program?

In any case, you know my stance on the Moon. It is a place for observatories, if anything. It should be like Antarctica. The place to colonize is beyond earth orbit, objects which do not orbit the Earth. Like Mars.

--Brian

 

[EarthlingX]

I don't understand why the majority of people replying to the poll thought canceling Constellation was a bad idea.

Most of those people voting are not from the forum. I think they are space fans, who were mislead with promises that were never meant to be delivered. I hope, they will take time, and check what forum and site has to offer, and then perhaps have a more complete and informed opinion on the subject.

Do not most people on this board support the Commercial Space Flight Program, in terms of SpaceX, Orbital et al.? Why continue the moon program, at least, the way it is known today, if we are doing the commercial space program?

In any case, you know my stance on the Moon. It is a place for observatories, if anything. It should be like Antarctica. The place to colonize is beyond earth orbit, objects which do not orbit the Earth. Like Mars.

--Brian