What if nasa budget was set to 5% of the federal budget ?

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">NASA was the one that proposed a grand vision of space back in 1969 when MSFC Director Von Braun proposed it. That vision included a shuttle, a heavy lift vehicle which would have been the Saturn-V in continued production, lunar and mars bases, nuclear transfer stages and more. </font><br /><br />Von Braun had been advocating these developments since the 50s. I think most likely he was told he would get all his toys mainly in order to keep him on board the Saturn program.<br />By 1969 I believe the real capabilities of the Soviets had become clear and it was known there was no way they would be able to conquer space with their advanced rockets (like the big N1) blowing up all the time.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Excellent points and yes, I recall Von Brauns earliest efforts at advocating the conquest of space with the best known example being the article in an early 1950s Collier Magazine. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

Sometimes I wish I had lived in those pre-Apollo days....true we had no Internet but we had a vision. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

In fact, I can easily see the day when NASA buys P.I. services to launch an unmanned probe to the outer planets from. "<br /><br />It already does. every unmanned launch is procured as launch services. NASA does not buy the rocket.

 

[arkady]

Having a fixed budget is a pretty inefficent way to finance an organisation. You don't wan't a bunch of money with some clever people figuring out what to do with it. You wan't those people to come come up with clever ideas, and then come ask for the money. Or atleast I thought that was one of the important lessons we learned over the last 30 years. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "<font color="#0000ff"><em>The choice is the Universe, or nothing</em> ... </font>" - H.G Wells </div>

 

[qso1]

jimfromnsf:<br />It already does. every unmanned launch is procured as launch services. NASA does not buy the rocket.<br /><br />Me:<br />The difference in how its done now and how P.I. could do it in the future is that when NASA gets its rockets and spacecraft from P.I. Its the usual suspects...the big companies. By now they have probably contracted smaller startups but I don't know for sure. Another difference is that when P.I. is contracted, they build to NASA specs which sometimes invites a little custom building which keeps costs at the upper end of the range.<br /><br />If some enterprising companies, including the ones already in business, decide to go to mars without NASA. They would build with profitability in mind knowing they are doing it themselves.<br /><br />Only time will tell if the P.I. way of going to earth orbit and/or beyond will actually work, be cost effective, and profitable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Another difference is that when P.I. is contracted, they build to NASA specs which sometimes invites a little custom building which keeps costs at the upper end of the range. "<br /><br />Not so. By definition, launch service is not procuring a rocket but a "service. Specs do not enter the picture. The procurement is place X payload into Y orbit