Ares/Orion on the blocks?

[darkwing_duck1]

Darkwing, are you saying its just pointless now at our current level of technology combined with the other problems we are facing, or pointless full stop.

I would say in an ideal world, where all other needs had been met and there was money left over, then I would support some sort of pure research space program. I would stipulate that with our present technology, it would be an UNmanned program, rather than a manned one.

Note that this is separate from the part of NASA that launches satellites and maintains the "Earth Orbit-Crossing" asteroid watch program, both of which DO have substantial benefits accrued from them.

 

[philbob]

That is a really stupid statemate when roughly 70% of the budget is just paying the troops and maintaing equitment and bases. Why shouldn't the troops be able to make competitive wages with the comerical market...unless you are advocating a return to the draft

I said it wasnt serious...it was more an argument that with a much larger budget it is possible for them to save money here and there without damaging the opperation of the armed forces, I have quite a few friends in the British Army and wish our government would give them even a fraction of what yours gets...so dont be thinking Im not a supporter of anyone who puts their lives at risk for their country (be it yours or mine). There was probably a better example out their but this was the first oneto come into my head.

The argument still stands that if (what your saying is) NASA should be scrapped thats a good mayb 20k unemployed, ok so thats small but in combination to however many people have lost their jobs recently thats more and more people who wouldnt be able to contribute to stabilising the economy.

Darkwing, are you saying its just pointless now at our current level of technology combined with the other problems we are facing, or pointless full stop.

As former marine I wish you military was adaquetly funded so what your guys oversees do would be easier and make our guys jobs easier in the end also I wish your goverment would give your military what it is due also im an avid amature naval historian (on rout to be an armchair admiral at 24) and it is truly sicking to see what has happend to the Royal Navy. Did you know that by 2020 the RN will only have 18 surface combatants the 12 aging type 23 frigates and only 6 type 45 destroyers (the most advanced warships in the world right now and that is coming from an American who loves his navy, of which are orginally 12 were orderd to replace the 14 type 42) Dont even get me started on your 'A' class submarine program

 

[Cicero]

NASA's budget is a piss in the ocean, cutting it is short-sighted and completely unnecessary.

totally agree cut welfair and foodstams and myraid of other social welfair programs that keep people as costly wards of the state

I'm alive today thanks to food stamps and housing assistance. When I was little, my family was all but bankrupted by medical bills for my younger brother (who died), and we couldn't fully afford our housing or our food. My father, a former army officer, had to give up his pursuit of a masters in computer science (shortly before the dot com boom, oddly enough) to work a number of low-paying or dangerous jobs to keep us fed, clothed, and housed. Eventually, he became a bus driver, raised our standard of living, and put my mother through a master's program instead (we were old enough that she could go to school in the day and sometimes in the evenings when my father could get time off). My mother is now a senior officer in the US military, and my sister and I went on to great academic success and have bright futures ahead of us. But we wouldn't be alive today without food stamps and housing assistance. My family would never have pulled itself back out of poverty, wouldn't have had food, wouldn't have had clothes, wouldn't have had a home.

Of course, if we had had universal health care, none of our troubles would have happened beyond the death of my brother, and my family would never have had an only a narrow escape from a downward financial spiral that was no fault of ours (we couldn't afford insurance on the salary of a teaching assistant, even though my dad also worked as a grader and in another part time job, too). I can't imagine where we'd be had the economy been bad.

Ironically, my ancestors include eight of the first ten Kings of England (William I, Henry I, Henry II, John, Henry III, Edward I, Edward II, Edward III), a Holy Roman Empress (Mathilda), and the man who ran England for Queen Elizabeth I (Sir William Cecil, Baron of Burghley). Wealth is passing.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Ironically, my ancestors include eight of the first ten Kings of England (William I, Henry I, Henry II, John, Henry III, Edward I, Edward II, Edward III), a Holy Roman Empress (Mathilda), and the man who ran England for Queen Elizabeth I (Sir William Cecil, Baron of Burghley). Wealth is passing.

There were Kings of England before William the Conqueror.

Traditionally, the line of English Monarchs begins with Egbert.

 

[Cicero]

Ironically, my ancestors include eight of the first ten Kings of England (William I, Henry I, Henry II, John, Henry III, Edward I, Edward II, Edward III), a Holy Roman Empress (Mathilda), and the man who ran England for Queen Elizabeth I (Sir William Cecil, Baron of Burghley). Wealth is passing.

There were Kings of England before William the Conqueror.

Traditionally, the line of English Monarchs begins with Egbert.

Right.

I should have said eight of the first eleven Norman Kings of England (I also forgot Henry the Young). Our genealogy also includes Alfred the Great, so I certainly should've remembered the earlier kings.

None of this is especially relevant, though. I was just making a point about wealth being fleeting.

 

[starburst]

Darkwing, are you saying its just pointless now at our current level of technology combined with the other problems we are facing, or pointless full stop.

I would say in an ideal world, where all other needs had been met and there was money left over, then I would support some sort of pure research space program. I would stipulate that with our present technology, it would be an UNmanned program, rather than a manned one.

Note that this is separate from the part of NASA that launches satellites and maintains the "Earth Orbit-Crossing" asteroid watch program, both of which DO have substantial benefits accrued from them.

I see what your saying, the only problem is if it were completely unmanned we wouldnt gain any experience dealing with space travel and so cant advance...the only comeback would be if we spent more money researching new technologies to advance the concept of manned flight, say some sort of artificial gravity generator allowing prolonged journeys.

One problem is manned space flight is a neccessity now as we have built the ISS and there are other satalites which tend to need maintanence.

As former marine I wish you military was adaquetly funded so what your guys oversees do would be easier and make our guys jobs easier in the end also I wish your goverment would give your military what it is due also im an avid amature naval historian (on rout to be an armchair admiral at 24) and it is truly sicking to see what has happend to the Royal Navy. Did you know that by 2020 the RN will only have 18 surface combatants the 12 aging type 23 frigates and only 6 type 45 destroyers (the most advanced warships in the world right now and that is coming from an American who loves his navy, of which are orginally 12 were orderd to replace the 14 type 42) Dont even get me started on your 'A' class submarine program

I completly agree on both counts, its scary how small our Navy has become. The British Army is renowned as being one of the best in the world, just a shame it takes our beloved government so long to give them the best kit and support (thankfully thats changed in recent years as quite a bit has been spent upgrading their kit)

 

[philbob]

From what i have read Gordon Brown has got to go.

In most naval circles the RN has fallen behind both the Indian and Chinese navy's.... I dont think the current day RN could win a fight against Chinese taskforce.

 

[Dayton3]

From what i have read Gordon Brown has got to go.

In most naval circles the RN has fallen behind both the Indian and Chinese navy's.... I dont think the current day RN could win a fight against Chinese taskforce.

I wouldn't say that.

I think that the Royal Navy would still take apart a Chinese task force.

But that might be the only battle it would win as the Chinese could throw more and more older yet serviceable vessels at the British and wear them down.

 

[Red Ranger]

People,

Well, I'm of two minds on manned spaceflight, especially in the current climate of global financial havoc.

On the one hand, manned space flight is a great adventure worthy of the high ideals of humanity. It may also generate unexpected answers to some of our current problems. Traveling to Mars and trying to determine why the water present on the Red Planet long ago dried up could help us maintain that precious resource on our big blue marble.

On the other hand, for the U.S./NASA alone to land on and explore Mars, it's a dam costly venture. I'd prefer a joint venture between several spacefaring nations to share the cost and the risk.

I think the objectives of manned spaceflight should be reversed from the Bush Administration's plan. First, let's go someplace we haven't been, then establish a permanent moon base from which to explore the asteroids.

Of course, it's rather sobering to realize that it's 2008, and in the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, they had a working presence on the moon and were sending a manned expedition to Jupiter (as well as Saturn in the novel).

Red Ranger

 

[Buck Rogers]

Well we'll be ending the Iraq war soon,and that cost savings could save the Space Program as we know it today,maybe even ally with the fledgling Private Space Program started by Rutan,and Branson.

I'm planing on starting up a Inovations company dedicated to creating the 21st Century Tech needed for advanced space Flight.

Lets think positive here for a change.

Signed

Buck Rogers

 

[philbob]

The PLAN (chinese navy) has built and commissioned 6 modern air defense destroyers, purchesded 4 upgraded Sovermeny class destroyers, and 6 multi mission frigates sence 2003. All the ships they have built indgenouslly are very stealthy and have very capable electronics. This isnt counting the rest of the older less stealthy fleet or submarine force both new construction and legacy assets (where the RN would trump) The RN by contrast has built 3 destroyers which havent finished sea trials and 2 submarines. The PLAN ships are also equipped for strike warfare unlike the RN ships

 

[philbob]

Well we'll be ending the Iraq war soon,and that cost savings could save the Space Program as we know it today,maybe even ally with the fledgling Private Space Program started by Rutan,and Branson.

I'm planing on starting up a Inovations company dedicated to creating the 21st Century Tech needed for advanced space Flight.

Lets think positive here for a change.

Signed

Buck Rogers

has anyone acutually read obama's postion on space that came out in like september? it is acutlly very well thought out with a good mix of comerical and goverment approach...sorry im a tad drunk right now

 

[John Picard]

From what i have read Gordon Brown has got to go.

In most naval circles the RN has fallen behind both the Indian and Chinese navy's.... I dont think the current day RN could win a fight against Chinese taskforce.

Unless the Chinese have damage control capabilities like US ships (and her allies), I wouldn't count on it. The Russian Navy of the Cold War was designed to lob a shit ton of missiles and run like hell during a conflict. One or two well placed hits and that ship was as good as sunk. No water tight doors, no compartmentization, zero firefighting -- NADA. On the other hand, the crew of the USS Samuel B Roberts literally stitched the ship together when she accidentally hit a mine in 1988.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

From what i have read Gordon Brown has got to go.

In most naval circles the RN has fallen behind both the Indian and Chinese navy's.... I dont think the current day RN could win a fight against Chinese taskforce.

I wouldn't say that.

I think that the Royal Navy would still take apart a Chinese task force.

But that might be the only battle it would win as the Chinese could throw more and more older yet serviceable vessels at the British and wear them down.

Don't be so sure...the Chinese Navy has caught the US fleet with it's pants down TWICE in the last year, the scariest time being when a Chinese sub popped up INSIDE a carrier-task force's escort screen...

 

[Dayton3]

From what i have read Gordon Brown has got to go.

In most naval circles the RN has fallen behind both the Indian and Chinese navy's.... I dont think the current day RN could win a fight against Chinese taskforce.

I wouldn't say that.

I think that the Royal Navy would still take apart a Chinese task force.

But that might be the only battle it would win as the Chinese could throw more and more older yet serviceable vessels at the British and wear them down.

Don't be so sure...the Chinese Navy has caught the US fleet with it's pants down TWICE in the last year, the scariest time being when a Chinese sub popped up INSIDE a carrier-task force's escort screen...

Not really.

It is peacetime. The U.S. Navy cannot fire on or take other measures universally considered hostile (like having one of its own submarines flood their torpedo tubes) in order to drive a Chinese submarine out of its perimeter around a carrier.

In regards to the earlier posts, there will NEVER be a time in the world where all needs on Earth are completely taken care of.

Should the U.S. refrain from sending a manned mission to Mars just because people are starving in some flyspeck dictatorship in Africa?

 

[darkwing_duck1]

It is peacetime. The U.S. Navy cannot fire on or take other measures universally considered hostile (like having one of its own submarines flood their torpedo tubes) in order to drive a Chinese submarine out of its perimeter around a carrier.

Which is completely beside the point. The Navy didn't even know the sub was THERE until it surfaced...if the Chinese had been so inclined, they could have launched a spread of torpedoes at close range and might well have sank or hopleslly crippled an aircraft carrier and/or one or more of the escorts.

The US Navy is the premiere naval force in the world (at the present time). If THEY could be taken by surprise like that by the Chinese, what chance would the Royal Navy have?

In regards to the earlier posts, there will NEVER be a time in the world where all needs on Earth are completely taken care of.

Not with with that attitude, at least...

Should the U.S. refrain from sending a manned mission to Mars just because people are starving in some flyspeck dictatorship in Africa?

Given that there are no discernable tangible benefits from such a trip and that there ARE tangible benefits to feeding the hungry, then the answer is a resounding "YES!"

 

[philbob]

It is peacetime. The U.S. Navy cannot fire on or take other measures universally considered hostile (like having one of its own submarines flood their torpedo tubes) in order to drive a Chinese submarine out of its perimeter around a carrier.

Which is completely beside the point. The Navy didn't even know the sub was THERE until it surfaced...if the Chinese had been so inclined, they could have launched a spread of torpedoes at close range and might well have sank or hopleslly crippled an aircraft carrier and/or one or more of the escorts.

The US Navy is the premiere naval force in the world (at the present time). If THEY could be taken by surprise like that by the Chinese, what chance would the Royal Navy have?

The RN was orginally designed as a ASW centric force but as i was saying RN ships are generally worn out, too few, and too single purpose where as China is gearing up to build 10 frigates (modern, multi mission, and stealthy) a year

In regards to the earlier posts, there will NEVER be a time in the world where all needs on Earth are completely taken care of.

Not with with that attitude, at least...


I second that

Should the U.S. refrain from sending a manned mission to Mars just because people are starving in some flyspeck dictatorship in Africa?

Given that there are no discernable tangible benefits from such a trip and that there ARE tangible benefits to feeding the hungry, then the answer is a resounding "YES!"

There are alot of tangible benifits from a manned expedion to mars

i dicked up that multi quote thing :O

 

[darkwing_duck1]

There are alot of tangible benifits from a manned expedion to mars...

Show me how one would lead to the homeless being housed, the hungry fed, and the sick cured and I might change my mind.

We were promised all sorts of things for decades from the space program: miracle alloys, super pure crystals, wonder drugs...NONE of it came to pass...

 

[Alpha_Geek]

...and the packaging system for plumpynut Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Food obviously came from major league baseball, right, duck?

 

[darkwing_duck1]

...and the packaging system for plumpynut Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Food obviously came from major league baseball, right, duck?

I'm not even sure what that is...link?