Budget authorised to keep Shuttle flying through 2011

[Andy44]

Can't be any worse than the last guy...

That's what I said when the last guy got elected. Each one makes me pine for the previous.

 

[BHawthorne]

The problem with goverment based spaceflight policy is the limited scope and duration of the programs implemented. We're talking about getting a few dozen people into space to do whatever pet project is funded by congress for those in thier state. NASA isn't a means to open spaceflight but to close it off and keep the bar so high that noone can qualify to participate in any form. As far as the risk factor arguement, NASA sets the risk management level of the program also at a level where it is out of reach for anyone else too. NASA prioritizes differently than what it would take to open space more to others in the future.

Hence, why I say NASA is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I disagree. There's nothing worth having for commercial purposes on the Moon.

You obviously don't understand how real estate and land speculation works then because there is billions of $$$ of undeveloped land on the moon that someone WILL cash in on in the future. Even the crappiest land on Earth still hold quite a lot of value.

 

[tblaxland]

You obviously don't understand how real estate and land speculation works then because there is billions of $$$ of undeveloped land on the moon that someone WILL cash in on in the future. Even the crappiest land on Earth still hold quite a lot of value.

By that arguement, Antartica would be worth a fortune and it is even easier to get to. In any case, there is also the Outer Space Treaty which kind of puts a damper on real estate values because you can't claim the land anyway:

outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means

 

[Hielor]

You obviously don't understand how real estate and land speculation works then because there is billions of $$$ of undeveloped land on the moon that someone WILL cash in on in the future. Even the crappiest land on Earth still hold quite a lot of value.

Nor do you. In order for land to be worth anything, there have to be people who want it. As tblaxland pointed out, there's a whole lot of undeveloped land in Antarctica, or the northern reaches of Canada or Siberia, or the Sahara, which is significantly more valuable than land on the moon and has yet to be developed.

---------- Post added at 09:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 PM ----------

That's what I said when the last guy got elected. Each one makes me pine for the previous.

Yeah, if Obama turns out to be worse than Bush, there won't be a 2012 election.

It would be very, very difficult to be worse than Bush, though.

 

[n72.75]

Can't be any worse than the last guy...

Yes he can, everone is in love with him so no one is picking out mistakes, trillion hear, trillion there.

Us americans nees to get our act together for 2012. We need someone like Regian.

The moon is so close, but yet so far.

 

[BHawthorne]

Yeah, if Obama turns out to be worse than Bush, there won't be a 2012 election.

It would be very, very difficult to be worse than Bush, though.

Oh, I think he's well on the way to being worse than Bush. He's giving the big boys that got him into office a free ride for what they did durring the Clinton and Bush years. Turning on the printing presses to print more cash isn't going to fix the fundamental issues. The problem is the system. We should not be throwing money at that same system. We shouldn't be propping up a broken industry, we should let it evolve naturally forcing change to occur. There is no incentive for the US industrial and economic center to correct when we throw trillions at the issue. Propping up the system is what got us into this mess to begin with. Things will just fall even harder onto it's ass in the future when the rug is pulled out from under everything. You can't spend your way out of ill conceived and implemented ideas.

 

[ryan]

I think the Government is gonna keep on pushing the retirement date of the shuttle becuase they dont like the Moon program. If it wasn't for politics i would be sun bathing on Mercury.

 

[Hielor]

Yes he can, everone is in love with him so no one is picking out mistakes, trillion hear, trillion there.

Us americans nees to get our act together for 2012. We need someone like Regian.

The moon is so close, but yet so far.

It would appear that you have forgotten how much of a moron Bush was.

Oh, I think he's well on the way to being worse than Bush. He's giving the big boys that got him into office a free ride for what they did durring the Clinton and Bush years. Turning on the printing presses to print more cash isn't going to fix the fundamental issues. The problem is the system. We should not be throwing money at that same system. We shouldn't be propping up a broken industry, we should let it evolve naturally forcing change to occur. There is no incentive for the US industrial and economic center to correct when we throw trillions at the issue. Propping up the system is what got us into this mess to begin with. Things will just fall even harder onto it's ass in the future when the rug is pulled out from under everything. You can't spend your way out of ill conceived and implemented ideas.

I agree totally. Instead, we should let the system collapse and the world descend into anarchy. Brilliant plan.

 

[tl8]

I agree totally. Instead, we should let the system collapse and the world descend into anarchy. Brilliant plan.

Well, Australia is quite ok with or with out America. I highly doubt if your system collapsed the world will descend into anarchy. The US might but most of the rest of the world will still be quite alright.

However what will or will not happen with the current US President has nothing to do with the retirement of the Space Shuttle.

Please get back on topic.

 

[BHawthorne]

It would appear that you have forgotten how much of a moron Bush was.


I agree totally. Instead, we should let the system collapse and the world descend into anarchy. Brilliant plan.

There is a lot of error in that logic. There are other more productive alternatives than bailing out the industry and economic base. Everyone in the US needs to quit buying most of thier stuff on credit cards. The industry needs to actually design and build things people want to buy at the price point they want to buy it at. Until people figure out how to do that, they're just burning up cash to prop up thier own self interests and screw everyone in the process. What part of that has anything to do with system collapse and anarchy? The infastrcture need not collapse to reinvent iteself into something more productive. That takes quality control audits, not anarchy...

Why should we reward failure on such a large level with such a large reward? These corporations are benifiting for keeping the status quo. Are you insinuating that they are owed all this cash because they are who they are? They are large enough to take off the training wheels and ride thier bicycles with the big boys. They should be responsible for thier own scrapes and bruises along the way.

 

[simonpro]

A cash cow is something which makes you money, not consumes it. I guess it's a cow for the people who work on the program, though.

Yeah, that's what I was meaning. The shuttle is beginning to seem more like a jobs program and less like a useful method of allowing research to continue in space.

 

[Urwumpe]

Yeah, that's what I was meaning. The shuttle is beginning to seem more like a jobs program and less like a useful method of allowing research to continue in space.

But of course, the problem is naming the alternative. What could the USA have done better instead of the Shuttle? That NASA has a strong emphasis on astronautics is sure not always in relation to the scientific gains, but also not the problem.

My personal opinion is: NASA did a lot wrong in managing the Shuttle program, but not in the general decision to develop a reusable space-plane or a large international space station. What should replace both major places in the US space program?

Instead land on Mars, without solving the technical problems of long-term astronautic first? Continue the moon landings with Apollo, but without solving the infrastructure problems related to the program (which is the biggest problem of the Shuttle: That it inherited the problems instead of solving them)?

There are not many options left for the USA historically. Stopping manned spaceflight will also not happen, not only because of the space race, but also because of a very cold reason: Manned spaceflight makes humans more attached to spaceflight and more willed to support it. How large would the NASA budget be today, with 20 years without manned spaceflight? Possibly there would be no NASA today, but instead a small department of the DOE.

 

[Andy44]

My personal opinion is: NASA did a lot wrong in managing the Shuttle program, but not in the general decision to develop a reusable space-plane or a large international space station.

I guess I could agree. As long as we have to have a government space program, developing a reusable spaceplane seems logical enough. I am of the opinion that STS tried to get ahead of its time, by assuming it could be both safe and economical like a jet transport. We just weren't there yet in the 1970s. Maybe if they had started smaller and built a dedicated experimental series of spaceplanes, complete with abort options, to study all the potential pitfalls of the upcoming STS then STS itself would've been better managed.

But STS is the way it is because NASA had to make do with the post-Apollo stingy budget. No test flights, no subscale test vehicles, just build us a working spaceplane and it better work immediately. Not even any money for a space station. Recycle Skylab instead (failed). Given the pressures NASA was under, I think STS is an amazing technical achievment. But you can't go half-assed in such a program. Fund it all or don't bother.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

You can't go half-assed in such a program. Fund it all or don't bother.

I think that just about sums up the U.S government's attitude to STS.

They are neither comitted to it, nor do they oppose it, IMHO.

 

[Urwumpe]

They are neither comitted to it, nor do they oppose it, IMHO.

Applies to many government activities. Just take the war against terror. They are not fully committed to it, but they are also not willed to oppose it.