Big Cuts Coming to NASA?

[sojourner]

^Are you sure you're on the right forum?

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Who said that returning the crew alive was a requirement? That's a western oddity.

 

[MrAtoZ]

Who said that returning the crew alive was a requirement? That's a western oddity.

Who said you had to return them at all....

 

[YellowSubmarine]

And while we're at it, if you can't get the trip forward right, why not keep sending manned missions until one of them succeeds?

On a more serious note, previous impossible challenges that humans undertook were following exactly this line of thinking. People went to places in spite of knowing it's extremely dangerous and the chances of success are small. I'm not sure that the change is only for good. Especially how easily we are willing to suspend flights when there's a rare failure.

On one hand, it's good that we have grown enough to ensure that our endeavours are always safe, and still manage to do everything with the safety requirements, on the other hand I'm a bit nostalgic about the risky approach.

For example, consider interstellar travel. With the dust in interstellar space, if relativistic travel is possible at all, it would be extremely dangerous. Does this mean we will never attempt it?

 

[Saquist]

Who said that returning the crew alive was a requirement? That's a western oddity.

A moment ago I laughed now I'm just puckering...

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Obama ran on an anti-NASA platform

That's a fucking lie.

No, it really isn't. Even former Apollo astronauts have called Obama's vision for NASA "devastating."

 

[David cgc]

^Well, that first link certainly looks like an unbiased source to me. And current, too! Yep, NASA will be in real trouble if Obama wins the election. Hopefully, Clinton will get the Democratic nomination and we won't even have to worry about it.

Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX, April 15, 2010

By the time President Obama cancelled Ares I/Orion earlier this year, the schedule had already slipped five years to 2017 and completing development would have required another $50 billion. Moreover, the cost per flight, inclusive of overhead, was estimated to be at least $1.5 billion compared to the $1 billion of Shuttle, despite carrying only four people to Shuttle's seven and almost no cargo.

The President quite reasonably concluded that spending $50 billion to develop a vehicle that would cost 50% more to operate, but carry 50% less payload was perhaps not the best possible use of funds. To quote a member of the Augustine Commission, which was convened by the President to analyze Ares/Orion, “If Santa Claus brought us the system tomorrow, fully developed, and the budget didn't change, our next action would have to be to cancel it,” because we can't afford the annual operating costs.

Cancellation was therefore simply a matter of time and thankfully we have a president with the political courage to do the right thing sooner rather than later.

Buzz Aldrin, Space Enthusiast, February 1, 2010

A near-term focus on lowering the cost of access to space and on developing key, cutting-edge technologies to take us further, faster, is just what our Nation needs to maintain its position as the leader in space exploration for the rest of this century. We need to be in this for the long haul, and this program will allow us to again be pushing the boundaries to achieve new and challenging things beyond Earth.

 

[Arrqh]

Here's some more from Bad Astronomy:

My overarching desire: that NASA have a clear goal, an actual set of specific, visionary destinations that will inspire the public and make us proud of our space program once again. Part of that desire is for this to have political support and funding to make it possible. Too often, NASA has been told to go do something but not given the money to do it, and that’s a major factor that we’re where we are right now.

Obama’s new policy, with one exception, will give NASA what it needs to be visionary again. That one exception — not returning to the Moon — is a strong one for me, and I will see what I can do to get it put back in. I’m just one guy, but I’ll talk to folks and see what trouble I can stir up.

As noted, the entire reason why NASA was in the position it was in was because of certain former administrations giving them a direction (like, say, Mars in 2020) without enough money.

 

[sojourner]

Obama ran on an anti-NASA platform

That's a fucking lie.

No, it really isn't. Even former Apollo astronauts have called Obama's vision for NASA "devastating."

That second link is from after Obama was elected. By 2 years. And is a prime example of the "old guard" NASA not realizing that constellation was being run into the ground. The former Apollo astronauts are blinded by nostalgia and the realities of NASA's present situation. If you actually read the article at the link you'll see even it says that NASA got a budget increase.

 

[Saquist]

That's a fucking lie.

No, it really isn't. Even former Apollo astronauts have called Obama's vision for NASA "devastating."

That second link is from after Obama was elected. By 2 years. And is a prime example of the "old guard" NASA not realizing that constellation was being run into the ground. The former Apollo astronauts are blinded by nostalgia and the realities of NASA's present situation. If you actually read the article at the link you'll see even it says that NASA got a budget increase.

It's not just nostalgia.
As much respect as the public has for NASA it's the pinnacle of misdirection and over spending. After 40 years having done nothing was my usual mark on NASA.

I started a new job a couple of weeks ago and a former NASA employee a 3D CAD draftsman who had been out of work for a year told me that the regular work ethic of NASA was that of a social club. Entire groups of Engineers and specialist taking Lunch breaks at the movies and parties on Company time. He said it was the high life and he was employed for 12 years and worked on STS 107, apparently the final Columbia Mission.

He told me on Thursday and literally confirmed everything I thought of NASA and the administration of it's goals, time and money. I was disgusted. It really is time to do away with NASA as a manned initiative for America. This coasting on the American Tax payers dollar at this time of economic collapse is exactly the short of expenditures that have got us to where the US is today.

Obama was supposed to change all that but it's clear that congress and the house would have to be obliterated in a wiped out before real change happens. One man can't do it alone and even if he could the public sentiment for NASA is so strong he'd be heckled out of office.

 

[sojourner]

^You say it's not nostalgia, but then go on to illustrate what NASA is like today as opposed to the "Can do" days of Apollo. That sounds like nostalgia to me. Color me confused.

 

[throwback]

NASA works in a world of science. With one political party opposed to science, NASA is facing an uphill battle to justify its existence.

 

[Saquist]

^^

You're confused? I'm confused too.
I said it wasn't nostalgia?

 

[FordSVT]

The article is from the Moonie Times, and it's just more anti-Obama bullshit.

Congress just passed funding for the James Webb space telescope. Obama gets no credit from anyone, even though certain parties have been swinging the possibility of that being cut around like a club for about a year.

 

[Saquist]

I've been thorn over this anti Obama thing...

Is it racism or is it party stupidity....

 

[throwback]

It's racism and ignorance, and people parroting what they hear.

 

[sojourner]

I wouldn't call it racist.

 

[throwback]

Racism plays a very large role in the rejection of President Obama by the right wing. You can dismiss this, Sojourner; however, every time I see our president depicted as a monkey, I can't ignore the very ugly and grotesque paintings of the 19th and 20th centuries that depicted blacks as being akin to monkeys. The racism may not be as blatant as it was, yet it exists. Furthermore, Sojourner, if you are unable to see the racism, I must consider the possibility that you may be bigoted toward blacks.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Op-ed pieces such as this, that play fast and loose with the truth and twist the facts, are nothing new. They predate Obama's presidency.

They unfairly blame the President of the "other" party with twisted facts, alleged rumors, or even outright lies, plausibly laundered to the reader under the cloak of opinion.

If it were to happen under any other President, which it has before and will in the future, it would be recognized as manipulative, but not as racist. The race angle in this is a red herring.

 

[Saquist]

Racism plays a very large role in the rejection of President Obama by the right wing. You can dismiss this, Sojourner; however, every time I see our president depicted as a monkey, I can't ignore the very ugly and grotesque paintings of the 19th and 20th centuries that depicted blacks as being akin to monkeys. The racism may not be as blatant as it was, yet it exists. Furthermore, Sojourner, if you are unable to see the racism, I must consider the possibility that you may be bigoted toward blacks.

I think it wise to be more discrete with application of racist on individuals because without definite knowledge one is opening themselves up to the nearly equal criticism of being prejudice.

I don't think Sojourner has depicted himself as racist.