Presidential panel says NASA's manned-flight future is bleak

Two stories with details of the preliminary conclusions reached today by the Augustine Panel that was instructed by Obama to investigate options for NASA.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ne...-says-nasas-mannedflight-future-is-bleak.html

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ne...-nasa-constellation-prorgam-unaffordable.html

With the situation being as it is it wouldn't be a good time for even a space loving president to request NASA receive more funds, and given the comments Obama made about NASA early in his campaigning I do not see him trying to get them substantially more money.

So it's goodbye moon, and hello to at least another couple of decades of watching humans get no further than LEO.

*sigh*




J.

The Chinese will beat us back to the moon (and probably Mars) for sure!

How many times was it shown here that NASA was toast if Obama got elected?

Naw, I have more hope in Rutan and his company than that.

America's time has come and gone. It'll be up to others to carry our race to the stars.

Good.

NASA needs to transition to Space DARPA and get out of the way.

Exactly who are NASA in the way of?

NASA is a creaking bureacracy with the oldest workforce in the federal govt.

Put the right person in charge of NASA's 18 billion a year and you would see America go somewhere in space.

As Dr. Robert Zubrin said

"In the real world, you can buy a lot for one billion dollars."

Now, now, do you know how much better those funds could be put to use buying the votes of the rabble.

When was the last time NASA was properly funded? Nixon? Ever?

And McCain was so forthcoming with his opinions on the matter.

Frankly, none of the candidates had a good plan for space. Clinton's, IMHO, was the best, but it didn't go far enough.

If you want a decent space program, then you're going to have to get angry. Angrier than the folks protesting the health care plans. Until then, we're going to get shit for a program.

1966. Since then, NASA's budget has essentially been frozen at $20 billion/yr (~ a few billion here and there, depending upon if they had a shuttle blow up or not) Adjusting for inflation, that works out to roughly $100 billion in today's money. Far less money than we gave the automakers and Wall St.

Worse, because of Congressional meddling, NASA's had to blow more money on some projects than they should have cost. Everyone bitched because Hubble's mirror wasn't ground properly and that NASA didn't do a ground test on the mirror which could have caught the problem before they launched. Nobody complained when the money to do that test was cut from NASA's budget before it was ever launched.

The simple fact of the matter is that a good number of people hate NASA, not because they think its wasteful, or that the government shouldn't be doing such things, but because they hate science and NASA's the symbol of science in America. These ignorant fucks think that they can continue to live their lives the same way every day, and nothing will ever change, all the while ignoring the fact that their very lives depend upon science, and that the rest of the world isn't going to be standing still.

We have a very narrow window of opportunity to push out into space, and once that window closes, even LEO is going to be "too much trouble" for us.

Just farther proof that man has never and never will go to the moon.

Drunk or trolling?

Well, NASA may be fucked. But let's look at the bright side: There's $200 for every black, Mexican, and Puerto Rican kid in New York City.

Damn, but you're a stupid one, aren't you.......

While I agree with your other sentiments, I'm not sure where you're going with this.
How exactly is there a narrow window of opportunity? Space isn't going anywhere.

So NASA is out, doesn't mean manned-flight is out. I suspect the private sector would produce a better product anyway. So give all the billions back to us taxpayers, and we'll give it a go.

Why has that not happened already?

The problem is that a moon or Mars mission is not commercially viable. You don't earn money by going there, at least not anywhere near the dimensions of what you have to spend. So going to moon or Mars is actually only possible for someone who doesn't have to look whether it is commercially worthwhile or not. Someone who can spend money just for advancing knowlege, without ever getting it back. That leaves the state.

But what amazes me that there are literally hundreds of billions of dollars available to support virtually every ailing business. What's this fucking mess about? Who cares if the recession would be a bit harder if the govt wouldn't be spending those billions upon trillions of your and your children's money? Let the recession be as hard as the companies responsible for it made it. The companies with a good business model will eventually recover. The economy will grow again. And then everything will be like it was before, except that currently, the gargantuan pile of national debt will still be there. And it will strangle governments for decades to come. Is that worthwhile? It's ridiculous.

I dunno, we've many failed public programs yet instead of shutting them down the response is often throwing more taxpayer millions/billions at the problem. All the while our taxes go up.

I don't think NASA is the first place where money is wasted. Just think of the economy stimulus or the military. Cancel the first and massively cut the military back to provide only for self defence and nothing more. You'll save trillions of dollars, the small budget for NASA doesn't make a difference in the grand scheme of things.

I still can't justify what we spent on Apollo.

I'm not unhappy that they'd do this to NASA. I am unhappy that they'll be doing it to the DOD next. Except, of course, for that tiny department with all the nice executive jets. How many Gulfstreams do you suppose they can get for a rusty aircraft carrier, anyway...?

Their are plenty of successful non-profit organizations. More than that I think there is money to be made in spaceflight, being the first spaceline (I may have just made that word up ) to visit the moon would be huge! More than that can you imagine how much any company would pay to have a lunar billboard that's visible from Earth?

Other than that space tourism is a decent market, couple of folk were willing to pay $20 million just for a sub-orbital flight. Throw in launching satellites, military applications and zero-g R&D and you're bound to turn a profit.

Simply put, space exploration isn't dependent upon any one government's program or agency.

Still not seeing how NASA is preventing any of those businesses from being created now though.

That's a bigger dream than a manned flight to Mars.

Nor do, not by a long shot. Plenty of taxpayer dough is flushed on much less worthy programs.

Money wasted is wasted regardless of goal. Give us dumb citizens our money back and let's see what happens. After all, the small budget for NASA doesn't make a difference in the grand scheme of things.

You think if taxes are cut, people will collectively and spontaneously begin to pay for private spaceflight?

Still not seeing why we should continue funding NASA until a private organization does it better. I mean that's the justification for the money pit known as NASA right? "Sure they can't get back to the moon and the shuttle blows but let's keep dumping cash into NASA because they'll come around and nothing short of a government program can put footprints on another world anyway."