New Panel Will Review NASA?s Shift in Spaceflight

[ericlp]

The challenges, Dr. Holdren said, included extending the life of the International Space Station beyond 2015, reviewing NASA?s strategy for returning to the Moon by 2020 and managing the upheaval to the work force in the space industry as the shuttle program winds down.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05...a.html?ref=global-home


Were going back to the moon!!!!!! Yay!!!!! hahaha

Well, I for one think it's about time I think we should use the moon as a stepping stone and build a moon base. Oh well, what ever happened to the space elevator?


Mr. Obama?s proposed $18.7 billion budget for NASA affirms plans to retire the three space shuttles by September 2010. Nine missions are left: one next week to repair and upgrade the Hubble Space Telescope, and eight to complete the International Space Station. Officials said they could accomplish all of the flights on the current schedule but indicated that if necessary the flights could be allowed to slip into 2011.

?The commitment is to complete those nine flights,? Mr. Scolese said.

Since 2005, NASA has worked on two rockets, Ares I and Ares V, to replace the space shuttles. But the development of the Ares I has encountered technical challenges and budget constraints, and critics have said other approaches, including adapting existing Atlas V and Delta IV rockets, would be cheaper and quicker.

The Ares I is to carry astronauts to the space station beginning in March 2015, but NASA faces much skepticism over whether the target can be met.

So where gonna scrap the space shuttle and go back to rockets? Maybe we ought to just work on building a new shuttle?

I dunno looks like your taking a step back on that decision.

 

[Cuda1447]

18 billion for NASA? What a fucking shame. Space research opens up so many possibilities to new technologies it makes me absolutely sick to my stomach that we only allow 19billion for this but we will bail out fucking bullshit companies to the tune of 100's of billions!

 

[Fear No Evil]

Everyone ripped Bush for not being a President who supports science.. I guess Obama is going to take it even further back. Its disapointing that the only places Obama can seem to cut are defense and space.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: ericlp
The challenges, Dr. Holdren said, included extending the life of the International Space Station beyond 2015, reviewing NASA?s strategy for returning to the Moon by 2020 and managing the upheaval to the work force in the space industry as the shuttle program winds down.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05...a.html?ref=global-home


Were going back to the moon!!!!!! Yay!!!!! hahaha

Well, I for one think it's about time I think we should use the moon as a stepping stone and build a moon base. Oh well, what ever happened to the space elevator?


Mr. Obama?s proposed $18.7 billion budget for NASA affirms plans to retire the three space shuttles by September 2010. Nine missions are left: one next week to repair and upgrade the Hubble Space Telescope, and eight to complete the International Space Station. Officials said they could accomplish all of the flights on the current schedule but indicated that if necessary the flights could be allowed to slip into 2011.

?The commitment is to complete those nine flights,? Mr. Scolese said.

Since 2005, NASA has worked on two rockets, Ares I and Ares V, to replace the space shuttles. But the development of the Ares I has encountered technical challenges and budget constraints, and critics have said other approaches, including adapting existing Atlas V and Delta IV rockets, would be cheaper and quicker.

The Ares I is to carry astronauts to the space station beginning in March 2015, but NASA faces much skepticism over whether the target can be met.

So where gonna scrap the space shuttle and go back to rockets? Maybe we ought to just work on building a new shuttle?

I dunno looks like your taking a step back on that decision.

The shuttle is the wrong tool for most jobs in space.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
18 billion for NASA? What a fucking shame. Space research opens up so many possibilities to new technologies it makes me absolutely sick to my stomach that we only allow 19billion for this but we will bail out fucking bullshit companies to the tune of 100's of billions!

Well, on the bright side, hi is spending 630 million more then what bush would have spent.


Mr. Obama?s spending plans would provide $630 million more for development work in 2010 and 2011 than what President George W. Bush requested last year. After the retirement of the shuttles, spending under Mr. Obama?s plan for the Ares rockets, and an Orion crew capsule, from 2011 to 2013 would sharply rise but would be $3.75 billion less than what Mr. Bush had proposed.


3.75 billion less? I don't see NASA going very far. He doesn't have enough money to budget resources for a new space craft even if we are going backwards. It's going to COST BILLIONS to make a new space vehicle ... To be honest they are way under funded so much that I wouldn't want to be strapped to one of them for a flight your chances are pretty slim you'd even make it off the launch pad.

Change.. What? Where? Oh well, lets just give more money to GM plus the banks need another half a trillion and maybe even MORE!!!



Space flight is at the bottom of the heap with this president.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Everyone ripped Bush for not being a President who supports science.. I guess Obama is going to take it even further back. Its disapointing that the only places Obama can seem to cut are defense and space.

Are you just figuring it out that our two party system sucks or maybe your having a rare epiphany?

 

[MovingTarget]

I hope that Obama really gets on board with the space program. The shuttle was a good step into space, as it is perfectly suited for construction of a space station, but it isn't good for good old fashioned space exploration. It is time we fulfilled the destiny of the Apollo program, and take up residence on the moon. Fortunately for the Orion, it is suited for this task, including trips to near earth asteroids, Lagrangian points, and maybe even Mars (although this I still have my doubts about....limitations of chemical rockets and human physiology for long-duration spaceflight kinda put a damper on that)

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: ericlp

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Everyone ripped Bush for not being a President who supports science.. I guess Obama is going to take it even further back. Its disapointing that the only places Obama can seem to cut are defense and space.

Are you just figuring it out that our two party system sucks or maybe your having a rare epiphany?

Since Bush is no longer the President and the Republicans don't have control of any branch of Government dealing with funding.. My statement has nothing to do with both party's sucking and more so with Obama being a worthless little bitch who can only cut spending for space and defense but can't manage to find a dime to cut anywhere else.

Hope that clarifies my position..

 

[Newbian]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: ericlp

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Everyone ripped Bush for not being a President who supports science.. I guess Obama is going to take it even further back. Its disapointing that the only places Obama can seem to cut are defense and space.

Are you just figuring it out that our two party system sucks or maybe your having a rare epiphany?

Since Bush is no longer the President and the Republicans don't have control of any branch of Government dealing with funding.. My statement has nothing to do with both party's sucking and more so with Obama being a worthless little bitch who can only cut spending for space and defense but can't manage to find a dime to cut anywhere else.

Hope that clarifies my position..

So tell us how you really feel.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: ericlp

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Everyone ripped Bush for not being a President who supports science.. I guess Obama is going to take it even further back. Its disapointing that the only places Obama can seem to cut are defense and space.

Are you just figuring it out that our two party system sucks or maybe your having a rare epiphany?

Since Bush is no longer the President and the Republicans don't have control of any branch of Government dealing with funding.. My statement has nothing to do with both party's sucking and more so with Obama being a worthless little bitch who can only cut spending for space and defense but can't manage to find a dime to cut anywhere else.

Hope that clarifies my position..

Heh, NASA receives only a pittance compared to the defense department. Nasa has had its funding stripped down compared to its operations ever since the end of the Apollo era. I don't think that Obama can really cut NASA without making serious compromises to its mission. Heck, we've all but stripped a number of promising science programs and are staring down a number of years without direct access to space. To me, this is outrageous.

The defense department, on the other hand, has plenty of room to cut without sacrificing the overall position of our forces. It has been a bit of a sacred cow for far too long. As far as the other areas, I tend to agree with you. There is a lot more we can stand to cut in other programs, but that is probably a topic for another thread.

 

[dainthomas]

Here is where NASA's money is going.

See how many of these banks you have to add up to equal NASA's budget. It's not a lot.

Discover: 1.25 billion
BOA: 15 billion
AMEX: 3.4 billion
PNC Financial (whoever that is): 7.5 billion
Suntrust Banks (whoever that is): 3.5 billion
BB&T Corp: 3.1 billion
Regions Financial (Birmingham): 3.5 billion
Capital One: 3.5 billion
KeyCorp: 2.5 billion
Wells Fargo: 25 billion
Morgan Stanley: 10 billion
JP Morgan: 25 billion
Goldman Sachs: 10 billion
Citigroup: 25 billion
US Bank: 6.6 billion

That's not even everyone who got over 1 billion, but I was tired of typing. Additionally, it looks like everyone and their dog got at least 100 mil.

Look at that list. There's your Mars mission and then some (maybe throw in a permanent moon base), plus the benefits of all the associated technology that gets developed for it.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Everyone ripped Bush for not being a President who supports science.. I guess Obama is going to take it even further back. Its disapointing that the only places Obama can seem to cut are defense and space.

Piss off you worthless hack.

+++++++

Back on topic... I'd like to see NASA get more funding. They've made incredible discoveries and created useful products here on earth. Hopefully they'll get an increase once the economy returns.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Everyone ripped Bush for not being a President who supports science.. I guess Obama is going to take it even further back. Its disapointing that the only places Obama can seem to cut are defense and space.

Piss off you worthless hack.

If Obama cuts spending what is wrong with what he said? Bush got a lot of shit on this board for not funding NASA as much as people liked. If Obama funds it even less shouldnt Obama get the same treatment?

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Everyone ripped Bush for not being a President who supports science.. I guess Obama is going to take it even further back. Its disapointing that the only places Obama can seem to cut are defense and space.

Piss off you worthless hack.

If Obama cuts spending what is wrong with what he said? Bush got a lot of shit on this board for not funding NASA as much as people liked. If Obama funds it even less shouldnt Obama get the same treatment?

While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Robor

While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

So what if Bush was against federal funding of embryonic stem cells? This topic is about NASA funding. And it appears Obama will be doing less of that Bush. So I ask the question again. If Bush was blasted for his funding of NASA shouldnt Obama as well?

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

So what if Bush was against federal funding of embryonic stem cells? This topic is about NASA funding. And it appears Obama will be doing less of that Bush. So I ask the question again. If Bush was blasted for his funding of NASA shouldnt Obama as well?

Were the economic circumstances equal then and now? I think that's a no.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

So what if Bush was against federal funding of embryonic stem cells? This topic is about NASA funding. And it appears Obama will be doing less of that Bush. So I ask the question again. If Bush was blasted for his funding of NASA shouldnt Obama as well?

Were the economic circumstances equal then and now? I think that's a no.

Yes the few billion Obama cut from NASA key compared to the 2 trillion dollar deficit and 800 billion stimulus package. What a dishonest response. Considering the above and we just gave Crysler 7 billion. It is obvious money is no object with this administration.

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

So what if Bush was against federal funding of embryonic stem cells? This topic is about NASA funding. And it appears Obama will be doing less of that Bush. So I ask the question again. If Bush was blasted for his funding of NASA shouldnt Obama as well?

Were the economic circumstances equal then and now? I think that's a no.

Talk about deflection and diversion. The correct answer is Yes. Obama should be blasted just as much as Bush was for cutting spending with NASA.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

So what if Bush was against federal funding of embryonic stem cells? This topic is about NASA funding. And it appears Obama will be doing less of that Bush. So I ask the question again. If Bush was blasted for his funding of NASA shouldnt Obama as well?

Were the economic circumstances equal then and now? I think that's a no.

Yes the few billion Obama cut from NASA key compared to the 2 trillion dollar deficit and 800 billion stimulus package. What a dishonest response. Considering the above and we just gave Crysler 7 billion. It is obvious money is no object with this administration.

You expected anything less than that from our resident Obama apologists??? None on the left can deal with any criticsm of his holiness. Some of us on the right regularly blasted Bush and his policies. But Obama and the left - not a chance. They will find one excuse after another to explain why identical policies from Bush was bad while under Obama they are good.

 

[dphantom]

Meanwhile, a moon base in my opinion is nice, but the more important goal is Mars. With the ISS operational, that should be our jumping off point to Mars or a large NEO asteroid as our next major step.

But funding needs to ramp up considerably. Maybe take the stimulus that doesn't stimulate much and put it in NASA's and private contractor hands to fund and build the rockets and spacecraft.

 

[CaptnKirk]

And so the Space Shuttle Program ending begins . . . not with a bang, but with a whimper
The last External Tank is moving down the line to completion, no more parts in the pipeline, the window for extension closed last Friday.
They're done, now let's move to the next program and get out of the past.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: dphantom
Meanwhile, a moon base in my opinion is nice, but the more important goal is Mars. With the ISS operational, that should be our jumping off point to Mars or a large NEO asteroid as our next major step.

But funding needs to ramp up considerably. Maybe take the stimulus that doesn't stimulate much and put it in NASA's and private contractor hands to fund and build the rockets and spacecraft.

Well the moon does provide an ideal testing ground for developing the technology and experience to utilize resources out in space, while still being in our own backyard. With the moon, it is much easier to rescue said astronauts or to resupply them should something go wrong.

If we simply do a few sorties to the moon, I agree it is worthless for the most part. A moon base would allow a long-running program to develop those resource utilization techniques while still having the added benefit of a gravity well - to keep the astronauts health from deteriorating too much during a long-term scientific mission.

The ultimate goal is Mars, maybe even Ceres. However, you have to test out your tech first. If we cannot successfully operate on the moon, then those are a lost cause, imho.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

So what if Bush was against federal funding of embryonic stem cells? This topic is about NASA funding. And it appears Obama will be doing less of that Bush. So I ask the question again. If Bush was blasted for his funding of NASA shouldnt Obama as well?

Were the economic circumstances equal then and now? I think that's a no.

Yes the few billion Obama cut from NASA key compared to the 2 trillion dollar deficit and 800 billion stimulus package. What a dishonest response. Considering the above and we just gave Crysler 7 billion. It is obvious money is no object with this administration.

If money was no object there would have been no cuts anywhere. Obama's first job is to fix the economy. He's doing what he thinks is best. Do I agree 100%? No, but I'm pretty sure no one does.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

So what if Bush was against federal funding of embryonic stem cells? This topic is about NASA funding. And it appears Obama will be doing less of that Bush. So I ask the question again. If Bush was blasted for his funding of NASA shouldnt Obama as well?

Were the economic circumstances equal then and now? I think that's a no.

Yes the few billion Obama cut from NASA key compared to the 2 trillion dollar deficit and 800 billion stimulus package. What a dishonest response. Considering the above and we just gave Crysler 7 billion. It is obvious money is no object with this administration.

You expected anything less than that from our resident Obama apologists??? None on the left can deal with any criticsm of his holiness. Some of us on the right regularly blasted Bush and his policies. But Obama and the left - not a chance. They will find one excuse after another to explain why identical policies from Bush was bad while under Obama they are good.

Originally posted by: Robor
While this is disappointing GWB's anti-science crusade was further reaching than Obama's. (embroyonic stem cells)

I think you have selective memory regarding righties on this board - or anywhere for that matter - blasting GWB. I know I don't remember any 'regular blasting' by the right.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: Robor

I think you have selective memory regarding righties on this board - or anywhere for that matter - blasting GWB. I know I don't remember any 'regular blasting' by the right.

Linky

Just one of too many to bother with those who have their own selective memory.