The Chandra X-ray spacecraft may soon go dark, threatening a great deal of astronomy

[Admin]

NASA's recent budget request doesn't offer hope for a leading X-ray astronomy spacecraft. Scientists are pretty worried.

The Chandra X-ray spacecraft may soon go dark, threatening a great deal of astronomy : Read more

 

[Unclear Engineer]

I don't like to discuss politics on science oriented websites, but budgets are inherently political.

So, how do the folks on here feel about the priority of, say student loan forgiveness expenditures compared to the Chandra budget?

And, within NASA's own budget, how do you prioritize Chandra compared to Artemis?

 

[COLGeek]

As a friendly reminder, stay on the science/space side of the topic, please.

Political banter will not be allowed.

 

[JAS]

Well, if the politics of science can't be discussed, then Space.com should be following its own rules and not post political-issue stories like budget cancellations. Personally, I don't see the difficulty with recognizing and discussing the issue of science funding since it is very relevant. I'd ask that Space.com reconsider its policy in light of the real world. Science does not exist in a vacuum.

 

[billslugg]

The mere posting of a politically sensitive subject is not, in itself, "political banter". "Political banter", in my opinion, is characterized by criticism, examination of motives, demeaning a particular political party and its members. These kind of things usually cause hurt feelings and the discussion goes downhill from there. That's what the owners of the site seem to want to avoid.

 

[Fission]

NASA's recent budget request doesn't offer hope for a leading X-ray astronomy spacecraft. Scientists are pretty worried.

The Chandra X-ray spacecraft may soon go dark, threatening a great deal of astronomy : Read more

Of course, choices have to be made when preparing a budget. It cannot include everything we might think of. However, it is worth noting the the project to return astronauts to the Moon and then on to Mars with a Martian colony punches a pretty big hole in the budget.

Unfortunately, the value of manned missions vs robotic missions has not received adequate attention. Chandra may only be the first of valuable scientific missions to either be shut down or, even worse, taken off the drawing board. We will regret the loss of valuable scientific data that can best be obtained by robotic missions. Missions that can be carried out at a fraction of the cost and without any risk to human life.

 

[billslugg]

There are "musts" and there are "wants". Having complete coverage at all wavelengths is a higher priority than sending humans anywhere past LEO. This is the same organization that lost 7 crew members trying to show the CIA they could hold to a two week launch schedule. Same organization that made an astronaut out of the Senator who funded it. And then put him in charge. It is an organization that cannot make a good decision.

 

[JAS]

I wonder if NASA has ever considered "selling" for a dollar an operational satellite it doesn’t have the operating budget to maintain in terms of program resources. The “purchasing” space agency would inherit a working satellite with some time remaining on its ‘clock’ along with the obligation to fund the associated program resources to fully utilize the satellite for scientific output. If it were done, in practice, the program resources would stay put physically and continue to run the satellite, making the scientific output available to the purchaser’s national science community as well as the general public in the same manner as is done now. I wonder if this is actually feasible/practical. If so, it would avoid the waste of science satellites being closed down before their ‘best before date’. The purchasing nation would have the prestige of having space assets at its disposal. Thoughts?

 

[Unclear Engineer]

I wonder if NASA has ever considered "selling" for a dollar an operational satellite it doesn’t have the operating budget to maintain in terms of program resources. The “purchasing” space agency would inherit a working satellite with some time remaining on its ‘clock’ along with the obligation to fund the associated program resources to fully utilize the satellite for scientific output.

That is a good idea that should at least be considered by NASA.

The budget would be something like $40 million per year for somebody to fund it conpletely.

I don't think the currently involved universities, etc. now being paid by NASA, would be able to keep spending that $40 million as they already are doing, but without reimbursement, unless some other entity steps up to pay those costs, somehow.

Who would that other entity be? If another country, then it might very well want to move those paychecks from wherever they are now to their own country, probably with some sort of transition period. But, if somebody like Musk or Bezos decided to pick it up, that would be interesting.

 

[COLGeek]

There are "musts" and there are "wants". Having complete coverage at all wavelengths is a higher priority than sending humans anywhere past LEO. This is the same organization that lost 7 crew members trying to show the CIA they could hold to a two week launch schedule. Same organization that made an astronaut out of the Senator who funded it. And then put him in charge. It is an organization that cannot make a good decision.

I referred to those as "requirements" and "desirements" in my previous lives.

We will always have more bills than resources to apply toward them.