NEW MOON MISSIONS

Look guys the vision is great. We can debate intelligently about the Moon or Mars but we must keep going. Yes the money is there...it is available. NASA is reallocating money from dead (or dead end programs) and is focusing it on the main goal, now that they have one. Sorry to say that we need a politician to lead us because if and when we need more money NASA will turn to the politicians.
Interesting - but I have been working, as an engineer, on the avionics and guidance systems for the Solid Rocket Boosters for about 11 years. Yes the Orbiter's airframe is from the late 70's to early 80's. They were meant to fly about 30 times each. None have met that mark yet. NASA has just upgraded their shuttle fleet's avionics and the SRB avionics as well. The Shuttle will fly for a few more years. During the down time we will rely on the Russians to support the station. NASA is planning another station at Lagrange 1. It is supposed to be used as a "terminal/science station". The CEV contract is coming down to final selection soon and NASA may actually have a "fly-off" similar to the Military has with competing aircraft. I am sorry to say that I also work on the Hubble Space Telecscope and a few of my friends are counting on these new programs for future jobs.
Yes disasters, such as war, has given us new technologies, but more came out of the Space programs because we had to "build new, non existing technologies". Not just to make things better - but to make or design something that has never existed or would have existed.
Well I am done with my rant for now. Yes... I am passionate on this subject as you can see in my sign off.

About the folks that say tanks rule...I respect that and they are formidable
vehicles indeed. However, missiles will take them out when deployed
properly and missiles did help us to win the Cold War more than anything
else in the military arsenal, I believe.

Well, I supose that if old Geoge W. went he might find some of these pesky weapons he got so worked up about! Perhaps the moon is made of cheese after all!

Well, politicians and funding aside, I sure hope we get the Eagles and Hawks to go along with that Moonbase!
And if they don't call it "Alpha," theres gonna be trouble...

QUOTE: Originally posted by Scott53 I'm all for space exploration, but I rather see it funded by cutting out the billions we give in foreign aid to countries like Israel, Egypt than thru higher taxes or cuts in our social programs.

I agree with You Scott53! I'd rather my tax dollars go to space exploration and tending to our own people rather than spending billions on third world countries that don't give a damn if we Americans live or die.
We could develop more efficient launch vehicles and test them by sending warheads to the ungrateful S.O.B's in the offending countries.

Here's an interesting analysis from an economist:

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/?040126ta_talk_surowiecki

QUOTE: Originally posted by Scott53 I'm all for space exploration, but I rather see it funded by cutting out the billions we give in foreign aid to countries like Israel, Egypt than thru higher taxes or cuts in our social programs.

I wouldn't count on it. There is no "Space Lobby" comparable to the Israel Lobby.

And the money to Egypt is money to Israel. We pay off the Egyptians so that they will stop hostilities with Israel. This secures Israel's southern flank. Note that Israel began military operations in the north (Lebanon) soon after their southern flank was secured.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Skywarner Actually, from the news reports I've read, most of the money for the next five years is coming from a reallocation of resources within NASA. Future administrations from whatever party is in office will have to decide if the funding should continue, and I'm sure that will be based on the progress at the time.

That may be true, but that's because Bush has set a very cautious pace for these missions, starting with years of R&D. When the missions themselves come into their own, then the real money will start being spent.

And even during the years where money is merely reallocated, what is it coming from in NASA? From NASA's current crop of projects, including things like the robots to other planets, the testing of the comets, and so on. And where will the money go? To planning for missions to the Moon, where we've gone already, and possibly to Mars, which frankly is a dubious prospect at best.

QUOTE: The shuttle is decades old and was simply not designed to leave Low Earth Orbit. Hence the need for a new space vehicle. Heck, even if the plan was simply just to carry on with LEO projects for the next 20 years, we would _still_ need to replace the shuttle.

Right. You have to learn to crawl before you learn to walk. And the shuttle program has proven the limitations to our crawling. Let's get that level of space travel down before even considering regular travel to the Moon or, God help us, to another planet.

QUOTE: For the past three administrations, NASA has been losing some of its vision and technical leadership. Now, hopefully, that will change and the rewards for us (maybe not short, short term but in our lifetimes) will be huge.

I don't see the huge rewards. Even the shuttle program itself never supported itself. They did their level best to dream up ways to use the shuttle, but little came of it. And if those benefits are so far off and ill-defined that we can't quantify them, how do we know they are coming? Aren't there much more pressing matters at home to deal with?

NASA needs to do realistic space exploration work. That's a real goal and a noble vision. It is doable without human crews.

Meanwhile, I note that this incredibly ambitious project, announced just a week or two ago, did not even rate a passing reference in the 2004 State of the Union address, what with the need to demonize gay marraige and to discuss steroids.

Steroids?

I agree but like I said before the program needs to get past the Politicians & Lobbiests looking to line their pockets with cut backs, I also beleive that as a citizen of the most powerful nation on the planet we should lead the way, by getting rid of the problems that pleage the world like terriorism, and sickiness', and look to the STARS, but we have the technology to do things but our government have KILLED this advancement through the lobbiest & dirty politicians ways, we need to get the DEADWEIGHT off the boat, or get them to row cause we don't need to over work the force by not doing our share of the work and complaining all the way to the bank

I'm all for space exploration, but I rather see it funded by cutting out the billions we give in foreign aid to countries like Israel, Egypt than thru higher taxes or cuts in our social programs.

First, I think we should wrap up some wars out there first, before we start major funding for space missions. I think for the time being the private sector has been making leaps and bounds improving the technologies on their own with private investors.....ie SpaceShipOne by Burt Rutan and Scaled Composites. However, obviously I would never make a great politician. But there are definately other people out there besides NASA who could do the job, so maybe we should set up smaller funding for research from the smaller groups. Just my opinion, but I'm not very knowledgable on the topic and where exactly any funding goes or comes from.

But I'm in if the modeling companies promise to make some kits!!! LOL

I like the idea of missions to the moon and mars. but I think that they need to come up with another reusable space vehicle to replace the shuttle before that (MHO).

i agree wiht everyhing said so far, the shuttle is almost a vintage aircraft now and it was meant to be replaced years ago (i seem to remember reading that due to it still being in use- at the time of writing - that it is already operating beyond its specifications and will eventually excede its structural lifespan. i supose the best way to go would be to use a low orbit craft similar to the shuttle and to have a space only craft as a earth - moon shuttle. the craft from space 1999 spring to mind here, i'm not saying actually build eagle transports just something that can do a similar job. now they have sadman hussein on a tight leash and when they do eventually get that bin laden then at least some funds will be freed. lets face it this planet will eventually become uninhabitable (albeit in tens of thousands of years) man kind will have to head to the stars in order to survive, isn't it better to make a start now rather than our decendants making a mad rush to get the job done?. just my 2pw.
Greg

Actually, from the news reports I've read, most of the money for the next five years is coming from a reallocation of resources within NASA. Future administrations from whatever party is in office will have to decide if the funding should continue, and I'm sure that will be based on the progress at the time.

The shuttle is decades old and was simply not designed to leave Low Earth Orbit. Hence the need for a new space vehicle. Heck, even if the plan was simply just to carry on with LEO projects for the next 20 years, we would _still_ need to replace the shuttle.

For the past three administrations, NASA has been losing some of its vision and technical leadership. Now, hopefully, that will change and the rewards for us (maybe not short, short term but in our lifetimes) will be huge.

As an IT professional for the past twenty years, and as someone with a family member who actually was involved in the Apollo missions, I for one am glad to see this plan put forward and NASA basically put on notice. Sure, the announcement has a political element, but it's ticking off as many folks as it is gaining supporters. Agree with the new space policy or not, you do have to admit that the President took a risk and made a decision (which in this case was recommended by the Challenger Commission). I wish leaders from both parties could do that once in a while. ;-)

I also agree with the prior post about the book "Case for Mars." Excellent read.

We all have to remember that exploration and the benefits gained from it will take time to realize. Just because I won't see a new super duper glue polymer or whatever on the Home Depot or LHS shelves as a result of the new Moon/Mars missions tomorrow does not mean that they should not eventually happen. As a society, we've become too engrossed with demanding instant answers and instant results.

As an aside, a local company up here in the frozen foothills of New York State announced today that they plan to DOUBLE the size of their work force for the 2nd time in one year. This company developed a polymer or some sort related to new heat shield technology that will make tiles obsolete. The company's CEO was on the news tonight saying how this new space initiative has already landed it a contract with NASA and that they hope to open additional facilities here in the next 2-3 years.

In any event, good discussion here. And, I am looking forward more than ever to the concept models. :-)

It's pure pre-election year politics. "The vision thing," as his father so eloquently put it. It's a Doctor Feelgood program. Americans feel good about the space program for its prestige value, because they do it more ambitiously than anyone else. It's just pandering to national pride.

Bush could not care less about space. He was governor of Texas, and yet the first time he ever visited the Johnson Space Center in his life was when the Columbia exploded last year.

Anyway, it'll cost a huge amount of money, will generate very, very few jobs per dollars spent, and frankly, where's the money going to come from? He's cutting taxes, and the deficit is climbing -- but he wants to spend billions to play in space? It's nuts.

It's even more nuts when you consider that the shuttle fleet is grounded following Columbia's explosion, and he's talking about Missions to the Moon and Mars? Puhleeze. It's like pulling a drowning kid out of the water while he's trying to swim across the local creek, and the soaked kid vowing that he's going to swim across the English Channel.

Right now, people do not need to go into space. Robots are perfect for it.

You're right though, the models will be cool.

Maybe this time they'll really go there

I agree with you Caine, but we go to get it past the Politicians who want to line their pockets with the funds tended for the programs and past the the lobbiests against any type of advancement of technologies for they want to be safe with their bicycle helmeted ways (I rode my bike for 30 years w/o a helmet and never had an accident{because I know how to ride a bicycle/motorcycle) and they want the funds for the poor and to keep them a non-productive entity in sociaty but with these programs the poor are able to get employed as an assemblers, parts handlers, ETC... and make some great cash for themselves and the corparations can & will train them for more productive or technical positions and they will be able to get away from the hand that feeds them and become a better person for themselves because they are able to do something by themselves without these lobbiest programs giving them funds to sit on their butts doing nothing, I worked in the Space Industry for 2 years and got laid off because of the Lobbiest ways, now don't get me wrong about the American way but now life is a risk, you could die just by going to work and getting hit by a Bus or a car, but this country has gotting so sue happy the great old systems will be in business today

Well it will be interesting to see what happens over the next few weeks and next few years. Remember the previous Bush proposed going to Mars and when they came back with a $1Trillion price tag...well obviously no one went for that. This will be a delicate operation and I really hope NASA and the politicians don't screw things up. This could easily turn into a fiasco if the wrong goals are set or the wrong method is used to go about it.

I think returning to the Moon is a good practice step, but we should eventually be looking out further. NASA's job has been to push the limits of technology, and unfortunately they have gotten away from that lately. Sure it is good that there was a thorough investigation and improvement made to the shuttles after their accidents... but the public has become too risk averse and that can be a major hinderance to risky operations such as space travel. People have to understand that there will likely be lives lost and that those that are did so knowing the risks. We can't push the limits of technology without taking risks or none of us alive today will ever see humans walk on Mars. If we are going to do this I hope we go for it without delay or it could be dead before it even starts.

I for one hope to work on a manned mission to Mars (as an engineer, not an astronaut...I'm realistic) and if were lucky that won't be too far into the future!

P.S. If you haven't read Bob Zubrin's book "The Case for Mars" I suggest you do. I don't agree with everything he says, but he has an inovative look at how we could be there in less than 10 years... and for far less than $1trillion.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Griz That's just what we need a Mao on the moon! They will probably want to build a wall

LOL Griz.
mark956

also if you think about it look at the War on Terriorism, the people in this country are now bored with it because nothing major has happened except Saddam's capture but today's soceity everything needs to be done yesterday, if you look at the situation NASA is in they don't have the Technology to go back to the moon like they did in the 60's & 70's and they destroyed the plans & drawings for the Apollo/Saturn V system granted we need a new type of launch system but if we had the first system then we'd beable to evolve from there, I feel the Shuttle system is in her last throughs because of budget cuts and lack of QA has cost the system badly but nothing like going back to basics and get back to the ole drawing board

QUOTE: Originally posted by Dave Toews I just wonder if the new intrest in the moon has anything to do with China's first space flight and it's announced intention to land on the moon. Things that make you go HUMMM....

That's just what we need a Mao on the moon! They will probably want to build a wall

We should have been there long ago! I think W's got the right idea, lets get back to the moon first. Kinda debug the colonization process a little closer to home. Too bad people get bored when things go well and then the funding goes away. I guess as long as we have hostility in the world, more people want the distraction and are willing to spend money.

let's face it, it's in wartime that the most rapid technological breakthrough are made... Although not a real 'hot' war, the 'Cold War' with the USSR was what fueled JFK's big idea, and its transformation into the Apollo program.. Now that China has indeed a 'foot in the door', it is possible that other nations will try to step up to keep the edge over them.

I'd think that creating a permanent presence on the moon would first require a more secure, larger and permanent presence in the ISS (or something bigger). I'm sure the US could pull this ut by themselves if they put the money into it, but I doubt this will happen (unless there's a (military) threat from China or another possible Space-faring country). At this stage, the ISS rely on Russia in terms of vehicles and Western money. I can not see the Shuttle doing this job (in a major way, in any case) anymore. New vehicles will need to be developed, and this will take time and lots more money. I want to see lots of countries involved in this.

I just wonder if the new intrest in the moon has anything to do with China's first space flight and it's announced intention to land on the moon. Things that make you go HUMMM....

I agree with what you just said Domi. It was the politicians who shut down the moon program in the 70's.
mark956

Great stuff, but will he release the money that's needed for it..? Will his successors in the White House have the same goals..? I have little faith in politicians giving us long term goals like that... Their terms and views are much narrower... And not everyone is JFK...

I'd love to see it happen, particularly if it involves other countries and is made with 'peace' in mind, but let's face it, NASA havebeen facing budget cuts and short term politics ever since the first moon landing was completed...

I also heard He wants to build a base on the Moon. He also wants missions to Mars. I do think it's a good idea.
mark956

IMHO, I think it's a great idea. It's an idea that NASA has wanted to push for a while now, and it looks like they are going to get to finally move forward. It's bold. I like that.

It's also going to be great for modeling! Looking forward to the first batch of concept models soon. ;-)