NOTE: This is an updated and renamed thread. Please scroll down for the latest update.

A blow to plans to return to the Moon?

quote:

++http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8321697.stm
A White House panel has suggested that Nasa should scrap its investment in the Ares rocket and instead focus on exploring places beyond the moon.
The recommendations have been made by a presidential advisory panel as part of a review of the US space programme.
The suggestions come just days before the Ares rocket is due to make its first test flight.
The review says the rocket is too expensive to replace the space shuttle, and will be ready too late.
The review suggests a shift away from moon-focused initiatives for human space exploration towards other destinations.
Panel Chairman Norman Augustine suggests that astronauts should aim for a nearby asteroid or one of the moons of Mars.
Space taxis
Nasa currently spends about half of its $18bn annual budget on its human space exploration programmes.
The prototype Ares rocket, designed to replace the shuttle, has taken four years of research at a cost of $350m.
But the rocket will not be ready to serve as a launcher for space station crews until 2017, by which time the International Space Station is due to have been removed from orbit.
"The slippage has caused a mismatch between what Ares-1 is needed for and what it's going to be able to do," Mr Augustine said.
The panel also proposes public-private partnerships - such as space taxis - to boost funding for space exploration and allow the space agency to focus on more challenging projects such as human exploration beyond the low-Earth orbit.
(...)


The Ares rocket programme is too expensive and too late, the report says

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Canuck_Centaur,

A simple glorified firework is a bit of a retrograde step though. It's depressing to think just how little launch technology has advanced in the last thirty years.
I can't really understand why though, there have been no end of innovative ideas most of which seem to have been stillborn.

Multistage rockets are *already* astounding efficient at converting propellant energy to payload energy ... there just isn't that much room for further improvement.

The really amazing gains have been in robot spacecraft ... for the price of the international space station we could have ... *should* have ... instead sent multiple autonomous robots to every planet of the solar system.

Just to see if there's any place out there where humans can live.

If not, then its time to get really serious about learning biology and ecology ... `cuz we're going to have to learn to recreate our own human-friendly ecosystems out there.

`Course, we humans are not doing all *that* great a job of taking care of the earthly ecosystem back home.

We sure have lots to learn ... lessons that bigger rockets won't teach us.

Once you've seen one moon they all look alike!

Sounds like a bill of goods being sounded out byy the oval office again. The report the other night was saying how great the rocket preformed, technology being in use for years, return to earth intact, reusable..

So now we're out of war making business, moon and mars business (I hope they remember the space station Russia might get pizz) but we're in health care, tax and trade, auto, banking, insurance, etc. I think the administration has a thing against all missile, large and small.

"http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/constellation/ares/index.html

We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:
We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

Such as?

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:
We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

Such as?

How about a coast to coast maglev train system?

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:
We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

Such as?

How about a coast to coast maglev train system?

Never happen the airlines and probably the car makers have far too much money to lose. Besides is not such a state-run system a bit socialistic for the US?

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:
We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

Such as?

How about a coast to coast maglev train system?

Never happen the airlines and probably the car makers have far too much money to lose. Besides is not such a state-run system a bit socialistic for the US?

Yeah! America don't need no stinkin' socialist ...





... Interstate Highway System!!!      

Do you know why the Interstate system was put into place?

quote:

The Interstate Highway System was authorized by the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956[8] – popularly known as the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956 – on June 29. It had been lobbied for by major U.S. automobile manufacturers and championed by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was influenced by his experiences as a young Army officer crossing the country in the 1919 Army Convoy on the Lincoln Highway, the first road across America. Eisenhower also had gained an appreciation of the German Autobahn network as a necessary component of a national defense system while he was serving as Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II.[9] In addition to facilitating private and commercial transportation, it would provide key ground transport routes for military supplies and troop deployments in case of an emergency or foreign invasion.

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:
We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

Really? I take it you don't use any of the everyday things that we have, that came about because of space exploration?

quote:

Originally posted by usmc_family:

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:
We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

Such as?

How about a coast to coast maglev train system?

Never happen the airlines and probably the car makers have far too much money to lose. Besides is not such a state-run system a bit socialistic for the US?

Yeah! America don't need no stinkin' socialist ...





... Interstate Highway System!!!      

I was going to add above (but forgot) that I'd always wondered how the federal gov't managed to justify such a large scale public works programme to certain political affiliations but Woody has gone and answered that.
Even Eisenhower would have difficulty nowadays I suspect, not simply for political reasons but because of the way almost all sorts of public works tend to be mismanaged and over budget 9note I mean this as a general not US specific problem).

LOL ... the public sector and the market sector *both* have pretty bad examples of mismanagement ... neither ideology is any kind of magic bullet for complex problems ... that's why the most healthy/prosperous nations have taken to merging the better aspects of both sectors ...

... the result is a pragmatic, checks-and-balances approach to economics and governance that works pretty well for everyone ... except for the far-left, the far-right, and fundamentalist zealots in general.

Sad to say, if you look at median incomes, health-care, longevity, and education ... for the past 30 years the USA has been slowly dropping out of the ranks of the most healthy/prosperous nations ... the decline began during the Reagan administration ... when the trickle-down failed to arrive for ordinary folks.

Fortunately, America's ultra-wealthy are still doing great!

quote:

Originally posted by Woody_in_La:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:
We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

Really? I take it you don't use any of the everyday things that we have, that came about because of space exploration?

What have you done for me lately NASA?

scrap'em before they waste another few billion, or kill another shuttle crew.

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by usmc_family:

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:

quote:

Originally posted by Bladensburg:

quote:

Originally posted by JBL266:
We should scrap nasa, spend our billions on something worthwhile.

Such as?

How about a coast to coast maglev train system?

Never happen the airlines and probably the car makers have far too much money to lose. Besides is not such a state-run system a bit socialistic for the US?

Yeah! America don't need no stinkin' socialist ...





... Interstate Highway System!!!      

I was going to add above (but forgot) that I'd always wondered how the federal gov't managed to justify such a large scale public works programme to certain political affiliations but Woody has gone and answered that.
Even Eisenhower would have difficulty nowadays I suspect, not simply for political reasons but because of the way almost all sorts of public works tend to be mismanaged and over budget 9note I mean this as a general not US specific problem).

It was an investment in infrastructure; our infrastructure has been falling apart for years. What we need is HUGE PROJECTS to employ many, and flex our tech to the world.

seems the hacks have already turned this into a political debate. I will say NASA has become a bloated and inefficient "institution" that takes too long and spends too much money on everything it does. Why we cant have a good and reliable reusable "space plane" by now is beyond my understanding. The shuttle was outdated within the first few years of service and became much more complicated than necessary. For example, Why the thousands of heat resistant tiles long after other materials and ways to protect the shuttle became available? why the old decades old computer systems while new technology made the shuttle equipment well past obsolete and unreliable?
Lockheed and Boeing along with the Russian programs consistently put larger payloads into orbit far cheaper than NASA and how many times have the Russians pulled the load on the ISS when the shuttles were grounded for a myriad of reasons.
Its far past time to allow more private sector involvement into the space program.

quote:

seems the hacks have already turned this into a political debate. I will say NASA has become a bloated and inefficient "institution" that takes too long and spends too much money on everything it does.

I suspect that the root of their problem is that they spend too much time and money on trying to please politicians and bean counters who all too often are scientifically illiterate (and proud of it in many cases). Too much money gets diverted off to keep these people happy to the detriment of actually useful projects.
Furthermore because they're so ignorant the polies (of whatever ilk) seem to have a hard job understanding that things sometimes fail consequently managers are far too willing to play it safe and bin projects that have more than a bit of risk involved before they have chance to succeed or fail.

Mind you I think that the latter point is common to almost all major projects these days, particularly government ones and particularly infrastructure ones. The sheer weight and expense of "management" chokes projects and the need to have "managers" running things rather than actual "doers" exacerbates the problem.

quote:

Why we cant have a good and reliable reusable "space plane" by now is beyond my understanding.

Years ago when the BBC still made the science programme Tomorrows World it seemed as if there was a new idea for a reusable launch vehicle every other week, notably the BAe HOTOL project. I can't believe that none of those ever got off the ground.

to think that all the obstacles encountered before cancellation of the various designed such as the BAe HOTOL, the Tupolev TR-2000, and the X-30 have been overcome and the designs basically proven. Would have been fascinating to be using such aircraft today from payload launches to limited passenger applications.

Looking up HOTOL on Wiki I see that a company called Reaction Engines claims to be working on a technological successor called the Skylon.

No political rhetoric on my part, but wasn't it President Kennedy wanting to stay current with the Soviet expansion into outer space (they were there first) and not relinquishing a very favorable position that could well be used militarily against your arse?????

Since we did go where no man venture before treaties were made. If we didn't Bosc three times a week.