Report looks at new space initiative

[adzel_3000]

Article here...<br /><br />http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4124376.stm <br /><br />and additional info here...<br /><br />http://www.amacad.org/projects/space.aspx

 

[toymaker]

For heaven's sake they should change the name already....<br />Nobody told them a name like AAAS isn't going to be seriously treated by policy makers ?

 

[adzel_3000]

<br />???

 

[lunatic133]

As much as I hate to say it, I bet the government doesn't want to listen to this guy because of his background. He was real involved in NASA during the Goldin era. So obviously he has political differences with those who are in power now. Although I have to think that if he wants to return space flight to how it was run when he was working there, then it's probably a good thing the government isnt listening.

 

[wvbraun]

George Abbey was a huge champion of the Space Shuttle program thereby preventing any real progress in manned space exploration. The guy has some nerve to come back and criticize NASA at a time when they're doing almost everything right (compared with what they did under Clinton).

 

[frodo1008]

Good Grief! vwbraun, leave the politics out of if possible. I just got away from that sort of thing over on Free Space. It is really very tiring. <br /><br />I know that politics itself plays an important part in the space program and NASA in particular, but can we just leave Clinton alone for once? He is the ex president not the current one. Heck, I have already complimented President Bush on both his vision for NASA and his excellent appointment of Griffen. Let us move on...

 

[wvbraun]

No problem. It wasn't meant as a political comment. I just wanted to point out that NASA is doing very well now compared to what happened during the 90s.

 

[frodo1008]

No problem. Glad to see you still active on this forum!<br /><br />I went to the first link and copied at least some of the more important items (at least I hope I did). If successful here it is:<br /><br />The four failures of national policy projected to hit future space successes that were highlighted by the paper were: <br /><br />The four negative finding were:<br /><br />(1) Inadequate planning for Nasa's future<br /><br />(2) Erosion of international co-operation in space<br /><br />(2) Congressional restrictions on the export of space technology that hinder sales to other countries and hamper information sharing across borders<br /><br />(4) A projected shortfall in the future US science and engineering workforce, made worse by visa restrictions on foreign students<br /><br />None of these seemed unreasonable to me at least. In particular the third one has been loudly complained about by the strong supporters of the commercialization of space on this forum!<br /><br />Then they certainly didn't seem to object to Mike Griffin, which is something that seems to have overwhelming support here on SDC!<br /><br />Dr Neal and Mr Abbey said they were hopeful about NASA's new administrator, Mike Griffin, who has a scientific background and has already begun to change the agency's much-criticized management culture. <br /><br />Perhaps rather that automatically jumping on them because of past associations we should instead read what they have to say and criticize them on the content of the report itself. Just a suggestion....<br /><br />