Obama Planning to Scrap Shuttle Replacement, Says NASA - Page 2

subchaser12 · 12-25-08, 12:15 PM

You all don't even take Christmas off from bitching about Obama? That's kinda creepy.

lesrae · 12-25-08, 02:45 PM

@subman1

I'm not sure what you mean about my logic - I just don't know if the cost of space flight etc has been recouped through the advancements.

You're right enough though, comms, GPS etc wouldn't be what they are without it - no argument there - I just wonder if research and advancement for it's own sake is worth it, or should we be spending the money putting things here on earth right before we go reaching too far.

Sometimes I just see the space race as just that, a very expensive game of one-upmanship.

Aramike · 12-25-08, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subchaser12

You all don't even take Christmas off from bitching about Obama? That's kinda creepy.

I thought this discussion was about the merits of NASA.

AntEater · 12-25-08, 03:17 PM

The Obama administration apparently wants to turn NASA away from prestigious missions like Mars or Moon to basic research like space probes, space telescopes and such.
More for Astrophysics, less for engineers.
As much as I would want to see men on the moon again or on Mars, if you don't have the money, you don't do it.
And apart from Moon/Mars missions, NASA only needs a manned spaceship for the ISS.
The russians can do personel transfer to ISS, in future even ESA might do it, so a US crew transfer vehicle is really a redundancy.
Apparently they try to outsource cargo flights to the ISS to private launch firms, a disaster in the making, IMHO.

Zachstar · 12-25-08, 03:31 PM

Subman you have no idea of the background behind any NASA decision.

Ares is going to be a failure. If it does not shake itself apart on the first flight. The mods will be so severe it will cost more to fly it than the shuttle.

SUBMAN1 · 12-25-08, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachstar

Subman you have no idea of the background behind any NASA decision.

Ares is going to be a failure. If it does not shake itself apart on the first flight. The mods will be so severe it will cost more to fly it than the shuttle.

This is just dumb - ignored.

-S

SUBMAN1 · 12-25-08, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lesrae

@subman1

I'm not sure what you mean about my logic - I just don't know if the cost of space flight etc has been recouped through the advancements.

You're right enough though, comms, GPS etc wouldn't be what they are without it - no argument there - I just wonder if research and advancement for it's own sake is worth it, or should we be spending the money putting things here on earth right before we go reaching too far.

Sometimes I just see the space race as just that, a very expensive game of one-upmanship.

Even one of the products above recouped ever last dollar invested.

-S

SUBMAN1 · 12-25-08, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by breadcatcher101

I used to have the numbers but NASA's budget is so low compared to other programs if it were completely shut down the money saved wouldn't even be noticed. Much better to fund it and have a leading edge in technology than to regress to a country that lacks any scientific resources.

About the best post in this entire thread. Their funding is already tiny as compared to any other program the US has.

-S

Zachstar · 12-25-08, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachstar

Subman you have no idea of the background behind any NASA decision.

Ares is going to be a failure. If it does not shake itself apart on the first flight. The mods will be so severe it will cost more to fly it than the shuttle.

This is just dumb - ignored.

-S

Glad you think you have spent the countless hours over the years looking at everything from the early ideas to what it is today.

But I guess that gets in the way of the "YAY new angle to attack the next president!"

baggygreen · 12-25-08, 05:52 PM

I'm devastated.

ignore the fact that scifi has used the theme for decades, but it is in space our future must lay.

Our population continues to grow, and without resorting to draconian measures, it wil keep growing for the forseeable future. Where can we send people? to space. How will we continue to learn about it without nasa continuing to develop new tech? Does anyone really expect the chinese to share their knowledge about space if they beome the leading space exploration nation in 20 or 30 years?? I sure dont.

One day the earth won't support humans. where will we go? Setting up fledgling bases on the moon and on mars are imho imperative to our ultimate survival.

Zachstar · 12-25-08, 06:01 PM

This is nothing about NASA developing new tech.

All Ares is these days is trying to figure out how to fix the next dumbass issue due to having to use a SRB as a first stage when military rockets have more payload.

The Delta IV heavy EASILY beats the current performance of this pork beast.

As for going to the stars. That will never happen with low ISP rockets and I mean never. To have a noticeable impact of population reduction you have to move over 100 million a year. Which means you have to have 747 sized spacecraft that are able to not only go to orbit but to the colony or mars or whatever.

Best guess is 50 years to do that (The main problems being engine tech and life support) IF things get much more serious.

NASA is done as far as advancing tech. The people inventing small steps like small fuel cells. Microwave thrusters, thin film solar.. etc... are the ones advancing tech and they are doing it faster than red tape Nasa could dream of.

baggygreen · 12-25-08, 06:12 PM

I dunno zach.

From what i've read, ares is looking good. Ultimately we just won't know until its tested.

I'll always try look for a positive though. If funding is cut, it might force nasa to look at streamlining spending, I understand they waste a LOT of money. So from that perspective, it needs a lot of work and this cut could be the start of a more efficient nasa.

As for the newer tech, i was under the impression JPL had their hands in on most of it, even including the solar sails? I'll happily stand corrected, but I thought they were heavily involved there.

PeriscopeDepth · 12-25-08, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachstar

Subman you have no idea of the background behind any NASA decision.

Ares is going to be a failure. If it does not shake itself apart on the first flight. The mods will be so severe it will cost more to fly it than the shuttle.

This is just dumb - ignored.

-S

http://www.space.com/news/080118-nas...ket-shake.html

Really? NASA Itself called the vibration problem "in the red zone" of engineering dangers.

PD

August · 12-25-08, 07:18 PM

The shaking issue doesn't seem to be all that difficult a technical hurdle.

Quote:

NASA officials hope to have a plan for fixing the design as early as March, and they do not expect it to delay the goal of returning astronauts to the moon by 2020. "I hope no one was so ill-informed as to believe that we would be able to develop a system to replace the shuttle without facing any challenges in doing so,'' NASA administrator Michael Griffin said in a statement to The Associated Press. "NASA has an excellent track record of resolving technical challenges. We're confident we'll solve this one as well.''

baggygreen · 12-25-08, 07:39 PM

So how easy would it be to put an orion capsule onto a Delta rocket? Any iddeas?

12-25-08, 03:17 PM	#19
AntEater Grey Wolf Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 936 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	The Obama administration apparently wants to turn NASA away from prestigious missions like Mars or Moon to basic research like space probes, space telescopes and such. More for Astrophysics, less for engineers. As much as I would want to see men on the moon again or on Mars, if you don't have the money, you don't do it. And apart from Moon/Mars missions, NASA only needs a manned spaceship for the ISS. The russians can do personel transfer to ISS, in future even ESA might do it, so a US crew transfer vehicle is really a redundancy. Apparently they try to outsource cargo flights to the ISS to private launch firms, a disaster in the making, IMHO. __________________

12-25-08, 03:31 PM	#20
Zachstar Sea Lord Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shreveport, Louisiana Posts: 1,956 Downloads: 13 Uploads: 0	Subman you have no idea of the background behind any NASA decision. Ares is going to be a failure. If it does not shake itself apart on the first flight. The mods will be so severe it will cost more to fly it than the shuttle. __________________

12-25-08, 06:01 PM	#26
Zachstar Sea Lord Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shreveport, Louisiana Posts: 1,956 Downloads: 13 Uploads: 0	This is nothing about NASA developing new tech. All Ares is these days is trying to figure out how to fix the next dumbass issue due to having to use a SRB as a first stage when military rockets have more payload. The Delta IV heavy EASILY beats the current performance of this pork beast. As for going to the stars. That will never happen with low ISP rockets and I mean never. To have a noticeable impact of population reduction you have to move over 100 million a year. Which means you have to have 747 sized spacecraft that are able to not only go to orbit but to the colony or mars or whatever. Best guess is 50 years to do that (The main problems being engine tech and life support) IF things get much more serious. NASA is done as far as advancing tech. The people inventing small steps like small fuel cells. Microwave thrusters, thin film solar.. etc... are the ones advancing tech and they are doing it faster than red tape Nasa could dream of. __________________

12-25-08, 12:15 PM	#16
subchaser12 Sonar Guy Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Spam, duplicate accounts, provoking moderators. Posts: 377 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	You all don't even take Christmas off from bitching about Obama? That's kinda creepy.

12-25-08, 02:45 PM	#17
lesrae Grey Wolf Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Somerset, UK. Posts: 932 Downloads: 31 Uploads: 0	@subman1 I'm not sure what you mean about my logic - I just don't know if the cost of space flight etc has been recouped through the advancements. You're right enough though, comms, GPS etc wouldn't be what they are without it - no argument there - I just wonder if research and advancement for it's own sake is worth it, or should we be spending the money putting things here on earth right before we go reaching too far. Sometimes I just see the space race as just that, a very expensive game of one-upmanship.

12-25-08, 05:52 PM	#25
baggygreen Sea Lord Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Canberra, ACT, Down Under (really On Top) Posts: 1,880 Downloads: 7 Uploads: 0	I'm devastated. ignore the fact that scifi has used the theme for decades, but it is in space our future must lay. Our population continues to grow, and without resorting to draconian measures, it wil keep growing for the forseeable future. Where can we send people? to space. How will we continue to learn about it without nasa continuing to develop new tech? Does anyone really expect the chinese to share their knowledge about space if they beome the leading space exploration nation in 20 or 30 years?? I sure dont. One day the earth won't support humans. where will we go? Setting up fledgling bases on the moon and on mars are imho imperative to our ultimate survival.

12-25-08, 06:12 PM	#27
baggygreen Sea Lord Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Canberra, ACT, Down Under (really On Top) Posts: 1,880 Downloads: 7 Uploads: 0	I dunno zach. From what i've read, ares is looking good. Ultimately we just won't know until its tested. I'll always try look for a positive though. If funding is cut, it might force nasa to look at streamlining spending, I understand they waste a LOT of money. So from that perspective, it needs a lot of work and this cut could be the start of a more efficient nasa. As for the newer tech, i was under the impression JPL had their hands in on most of it, even including the solar sails? I'll happily stand corrected, but I thought they were heavily involved there.

12-25-08, 07:39 PM	#30
baggygreen Sea Lord Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Canberra, ACT, Down Under (really On Top) Posts: 1,880 Downloads: 7 Uploads: 0	So how easy would it be to put an orion capsule onto a Delta rocket? Any iddeas?