My interest is peaked by Bush's imminent announcement for the almost total overhaul of NASA priorities, due on Wednesday.
Among the things he wants to do is ditch the space shuttle and head back to the moon and ultimately to Mars. Key to this strategy, many experts say, is to abandon the troubled ISS as soon as possible and focus on putting a permenant station up at L1. Why? An L1 waystation would facilitate trips to the moon, since it's way easier to get people to L1 with one shuttle system and then to the moon with another, than with one ship. Plus, it's also really easy to keep a station floating at L1 in an area of gravitational cancellation, than in low earth orbit where you have to reboost the station to keep it flying.
Following this is a permenant presence on the Moon, which would theorhetically allow for new technologies to be tested out for an ultimate venture to Mars. The Moon could offer other opportunites besides science in the immediate future, such as a solar power source, and a solar or stellar observatory unencumbered by an atmosphere.
As much a fan as I am of the manned space program, I think Bush is nuts for doing this. We've got plenty of stuff to fix on Earth, and I personally think that the ISS still has plenty to offer. IMO, if NASA is to get more money, they should use it to complete and expand the ISS, replace the shuttle, and focus on lots and lots of unmanned probes to the Moon, Mars and Jupiter. The moon is a secondary priority, and Mars is a far-distant third.
In the end though, this announcement, and the potential ADDITIONAL waste of billions of dollars by NASA into cool things that'll get cancelled later by following administrations, comes down to one thing. Stoopid re-election politics.
Mark
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: As much a fan as I am of the manned space program, I think Bush is nuts for doing this. We've got plenty of stuff to fix on Earth, and I personally think that the ISS still has plenty to offer.
There'll ALWAYS be stuff that needs fixing on Earth: that's exactly what Kennedy's opponents said about the moon missions. The money's better spent on NASA than on military applications. And it's not like the money's going to spend on public works projects if NASA doesnt get it. Republicans, remember?
If the public gets behind the idea for a new lunar base, the next administration wont shoot it down and the the ones that killed the dream of space exploration.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"The money's better spent on NASA than on military applications."
With Bush backing it, don't be so sure it isn't both.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Hmm, the Star Wars program is starting up again...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Not from the Moon, it's not. I think this is more a case of "America first" than any attempt at space based weapons systems. ...at least initially, anyway.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
As it is one of the few government programs which consistently generates more wealth than it consumes, boosting the space program is good economic policy.
As I've said before, I believe that a good Space policy would include:
Ongoing: Continued planetary exploration. I want every object in the system located and mapped, robot landers and/or minilanders on every moon larger than Amalthea. Development of next-generation space telescopes, interferometers, and other projects designed to detect extrasolar worlds.
#1. We need reliable, reusable systems: for cargo, and for people. A passenger liner and a heavy lifter. They don't necessarily have to be the same system.
#2. Expanded orbital and near-orbital facilities. Including construction facilities to aid in assembly of components for large-scale missions. (this would be the stuff to go into the Lagrange points... In fact, I think we have a space telescope going to the Earth-trailling point at the moment.)
#3. A network of orbital energy stations. We can DO this, I'm convinced. What we really need is for the government to offer a miultibillion-dollar "X-prize" (and a supply contract?) to the first commercial energy supplier to 'beam' a megawatt of energy safely back to Earth. Hey! let's see if Halliburton can do it!
#4. Detailed lunar exploration, including landers. Make certain of ice on Moon, if there is any.
#5 Moonbase, if ice makes it feasible. Otherwise, it might have to be put off until we can get some.
#6 Mars mission. Moderate scale, for now.
#7 Mass drivers. Capture or deflect comets, asteroids. If H20 absent on moon, jump this priority up and drop a couple tiny comets onto the Moon's south pole.
#8 Near-Earth Asteroid capture, and mining facilities.
#9 Larger-scale Mars missions. Terraforming activities (presuming no life is found on Mars). Colonization.
#10 Extrasolar probe missions as soon as feasable. Ion engines will help this along. We need to be able to accelerate and decelerate a Voyager-type probe at high G's to get to nearby stars.
Money worries about going to Mars? PIFFLE! The 2004 federal budget is $2.2 trillion. NASA's is $15.5 billion. Reasonable estimates suggest the space agency's share of the pie would only need to rise gradually to $20 billion within a few years if footprints are to be made in Martian dust within a generation.
The technology that would be developed over the next 20 years, in preparation, along with the medical knowledge gleaned from long-term low-gravity living and exposure to high levels of radiation, will have unknown but surely significant benefits to those who remain on this planet. In medicine alone, NASA spinoff technology has a solid track record, having given us MRI and CAT scanners, among many other benefits.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
We can start within the decade by building a small lunar facility for habitation (provided there's ice for water refinment) and the deployment of a spaceborne telescope on the moons's dark side. A telescope there would have 50 times the viewing capacity of Hubble and pretty pictures get people on your side more than even he potential for meical breakthroughs.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Sadly, this will probably be "Americans in Space", instead of "Humans in Space". But of course, it's the Americans who will be electing a new president this year, and not us.
Sorry for being a bit cynical, but Bush doesn't really strike me as someone who gives a rat's ass about the space program.
Anyway, he's speaking now, let's hear what he's got to say.. at least he's already mentioned the Russians.
And he also mentions Lewis and Clarke. UNSS Lewis and Clarke anyone ?
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
United Navy Space Ship?
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Fandom has the UNSS (United Nations etc.) Lewis and Clarke as the first ship to make contact with Alpha Centauri
Bush just said "It's not a race, it's a journey". That's good.
Of course, by the time these plans should begin, Bush won't be president anymore...
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
"Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to my moonbase!"
Actually, Bush seems a lot like Dr Evil to me!
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I swear he was reading from the Junior Encyclopedia of Space. Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
The USAF Rescue ship Lewis and Clark was also the ship captained by Morpheus to go and rescue the survivors of the experimental Event Horizon, which had just concluded a 13-year flight to the dimension of EVIL!!!
*ahem*
Okay, I watched Bush's speech today. In a nutshell, he has outlined the following concrete goals:
2008 - Unmanned lunar satellites and landers to pave the way for manned expeditions
2010 - Completion of US commitments to the ISS, and retirement of the space shuttle
2014 - First flight of what he has termed a "Crew Exploration Vehicle", or CEV. This vehicle (not likely a planiform ship, but rather a capsule-based system) will have the ability to take astronauts to destinations in Earth orbit (ISS) and to the moon (Apollo-style, I'd guess).
2015 - CEV returns people to the moon
2020 - Permenant manned lunar presence. This base will develop and test technologies for the inevitable missions to Mars, as well as develop science and commercial applications of the Moon for us down here.
To start, Bush has asked NASA to reallocate about $11B of the $86B given to it over the next five years; he has also marked an additional $1B per year for this duration. NASA is to get back to him in four months with a detailed plan to accomplish all this stuff; it will be overseen by a former USAF general.
Thoughts?
Mark
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Come to think of it, given that this is George W. Bush we're talking about here, chances are that he's doing this because he doesn't want "those durn slant-eyes" landing on the moon if we aren't there to greet them.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"If the public gets behind the idea for a new lunar base, the next administration wont shoot it down and the the ones that killed the dream of space exploration."
Well, that's a pretty big if. Don't forget this is the same public that couldn't even get behind the idea of a manned space station...
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
OK, now only the first two will have any impact on his administration, assuming he gets a second term:
2008 - Unmanned lunar satellites and landers to pave the way for manned expeditions
Rather nebulous, this. How exactly will they "pave the way" for future landings? By finding nice places to land? Big wow. That's not going to get them any closer to having anything that'll get them anywhere near the moon let alone onto it.
2010 - Completion of US commitments to the ISS, and retirement of the space shuttle.
And then? Sorry, Dude, Where's My Car? references aside, from now on we're in the realm of Bush's successor, be he Rep or Dem (that he'll also be a rich middle-aged WASP isn't in any doubt). So whether or not this or any other part of the "roadmap to space" come to pass really doesn't matter as far as the Bush administration is concerned. But what exactly is meant by the completion of their commitment to the ISS? And as for retiring the shuttles, why not do it now? They're death traps, they're uneconomical, and their capacity as launch platforms is limited to something about the size and weight of your average SUV. But don't worry, let the shuttle get scrapped on someone else's watch and let them carry the can for Proxmiring the shuttle.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Bush will be out of office by 2008.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Someone had better bookmark that comment.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Okay, the ONE thing I'm really wondering about is the dubious goal of using the Moon as a staging platform for launches to other planets. How does this work? I mean, unless you BUILD the ships there, there's no point in shipping a bunch of stuff to the Moon, assembling it there, and then launching it AGAIN to a final destination. There's no real technology or infrastructure yet developed to establish manufacturing capabilities in space, let alone on the moon, where gravity would muck up construction stuff anyway. 99% of all studies of missions to other planets involve assembly of a larger ship in Earth orbit and launching it from there. I suppose you could use lunar regolith to process into oxygen, fuel and possibly air/water if ice is there; but certainly not a ship. Anyone care to speculate on the deal here?
Additional: Here is the official government release on the whole thing. Take it as you will.
Mark
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: Someone had better bookmark that comment.
He'd have to be: two term limit and all. Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Why a moon base? Breathalyzers don't work in a vacuum do they?
Which is to say that as excited as I am about a president with a vision for a human future in space, I'll believe it when I see it. An additional paltry $1 billion per year will not buy you a brand-spankin' new re-usable 3-8 person space vehicle in 4 years. Nor does asking the notoriously bureaucratic NASA to re-allocate $11 bil. I'm not saying this can't or shouldn't be done. I'm just SUPER skeptical about A) his motives, B) his true dedication to this idea.
I suppose since Mission Control is in Houston, that maybe he's not spewing total BS. I want to believe. But, frankly, from what I've seen so far, I don't.
Posted by leuckinc (Member # 729) on :
I would think that this plan is better then the currnet NASA plan, right?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Actually, he'll be out of office, what, about Jan 20th, 2009, isn't it?
IF - that a big enough if for ya? - he gets a second term, that is.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
It's time to send more than tinker toys to Mars. I think there should be a moon base....we'll just call it "Alpha". Then we make these multipurpose ships....let's just call them "Eagles".....
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Of course, if the public gets excited about this and the Democrats shoot down this new "dream of exploration" they'll look like total shit.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lee: Actually, he'll be out of office, what, about Jan 20th, 2009, isn't it?
IF - that a big enough if for ya? - he gets a second term, that is.
Please find me ANYONE worth voting for, Lee.
Before you do though, I just want to say: Good luck, we're all counting on you.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Me!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yeah, then the President would be correcting my spelling mistakes.... Probably via some Secret Service goons too.
Pass.
Still...better you than Austin.
Or (God forbid), Omega!
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"That's not going to get them any closer to having anything that'll get them anywhere near the moon let alone onto it."
Well, we already know how to get onto the moon. We've done it before. I'm sure we're a little rusty after all these years, but it's not like we'd have to figure it out from scratch.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Ah, space. Just when you think everyone wants to go back to the moon and finally get to Mars...everything changes.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Charles for President!! Today Flare Tomorrow America A week from next Thursday, the world!
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
quote:Still...better you than Austin.
@Jason: Remember Arnold Schwarzinator aka governor of California? Now what does he have in common with me - why he can't become president?
Not that I wanted the job anyway...if I really had to correct all your spelling mistakes, I wouldn't be able to do anything else...like actually heading the country. Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Well Psyliam cant be President for the same reason, but we're just making silly speculation so...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Super-fly-double-post.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
How do you know I'm not American? Apart from the fact that I am charming, witty, not fat, understand irony, and have a decent haircut?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
That's what passes for a decent haircut? DEFINITELY not American. Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
It's the whole not-wearing-shorts thing that gives him away, every time.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I must say - I'm the first to say YES to manned missions - BUT!
I think NASA needs to get a better success rate at getting probes to Mars safely.
We need a new reusable space vehicle... it's a wonder the X-prize hasn't taken off more (scuse the pun).
We need to get more planetary probes out there.
We've only been to Mercury ONCE and only have mapped 45% of the surface.
We need to go to Pluto and Charon... is the mission still on for that?
We need Galileo/Cassini type missions to Uranus and Neptune.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
P.S. We need to dig up the Stargate.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
We need Zefram Cochrane!
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Now what does he have in common with me..."
The accent, probably. B)
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
quote: Originally posted by Psilly-am:
How do you know I'm not American? Apart from the fact that I am charming, witty, not fat, understand irony, and have a decent haircut?
Danger Will Robinson, Danger! Conceit detectors are off the scale....Probable British unit approaching...DANGER!
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
You confusing me for French there, boy?
And Austin won't have the same accent as Arnie, being that they are from different countries and all.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
quote: You confusing me for French there, boy?
The French are a MYTH...like Intelligent Blondes...or Jason doing a good deed.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
The New Horizons Project is still on track. Almost got killed, but got its ass saved at the last second. As for the X-Prize, take a look at what Burt Rutan and Scaled Composites are doing...
President Bush: I have ordered the future parents of Zefram Cochrane to keep him healthy and well so that, in 2063, he may be fit to launch man's first warp-capable vessel. As for World War III, leave that part to me!
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"I'm sure we're a little rusty after all these years, but it's not like we'd have to figure it out from scratch."
Hmm... actually, after the Apollo program ended, all equipment, tools and plans for building the Saturn V rocket were lost, junked or retired, and since even larger boosters would likely be required for a new lunar effort (depending on the mission scheme selected), NASA would sort of have to do just that.
Anyway, we'll see how this pans out. That is, IF it pans out, of course.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I said they wouldn't have to figure it out again, not that the equipment wouldn't need to be rebuilt. I'm sure the knowledge of how to build a rocket to the moon has not been lost.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Surely not.
And @Cartman: my accent IS completely different from Arnie's.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by WizArtist:
quote: You confusing me for French there, boy?
The French are a MYTH...like Intelligent Blondes...or Jason doing a good deed.
A world where the French are a myth.... if only... Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: We've only been to Mercury ONCE and only have mapped 45% of the surface.
We need to go to Pluto and Charon... is the mission still on for that?
We need Galileo/Cassini type missions to Uranus and Neptune.
MESSENGER will launch for Mercury in May, do some flybys of Venus and Mercury, and settle into orbit of Mercury in 2009. (Why so long? It has to do with changing delta-V closer into the sun, and shedding momentum.)
New Horizons , to Pluto, Charon, and Kuiper belt, is scheduled for launch in Jan '06
As for other Planetary missions... Well, that's why you need to elect ME in 2008 instead of these bozos.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
2006? Damn. And it will probably take several years for it to GET to Pluto. Oh well, I guess I'll just have to have patience before I can see our farthest planet...
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Mars Mission a Trojan Horse? A less ominous article than the headline suggests. Still, a nice way to prop up the ailing aerospace industry, garner some of that feel-good 20th century nostalgia, and get off scot-free when the next administration realizes the whole thing is a boondoggle and cancels it, where one interested in those ends.
And while I'm being cynical, NASA's first move in its reinvigorated, vision-infused era? Scrapping the Hubble ahead of schedule.
And now just to be snippy: What exactly do we get out of an expensive Martian photo-op again?
Space exploration is incredibly sexy, and reminds us all of the good old days when we could assume our office buildings were safe, but is that enough?
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
I hate the people who say "we've got too much to deal with down here first!" There will ALWAYS be too much to deal with down here. If we wait until we have everything handled on Earth, we're going to be waiting until we either kill ourselves, destroy the entire ecosphere, or the sun blows up. There will always be reasons why not. People who let the reasons why not decide for them will never accomplish a goddamn thing. The people who said the Earth was flat stayed behind in Eurasia. We have no idea who they were. But we remember the Polynesians, the Portugese, the Phoenicians, the Norsemen -- and some highly-celebrated individuals like Columbus, Eriksson, and Magellan. The people who have opposed advances in aviation right from the very concept of airplanes themselves have been utterly forgotten. But we remember the Wright Brothers, Charles Lindbergh, and Chuck Yeager.
Our world would be a damn sight different if Columbus and those guys had stayed home, or if the Wrights and people like them had decided only birds should fly. How much of what we take for granted and depend on is due to people daring in the face of all the reasons why not? How much of what we have and depend on today was spawned from the Space Race of the '60s? How much more will we get out of this? I can't even begin to speculate the advances in materials and construction technology. And I have the merest inkling of what's possible out of studying the long-term effects of microgravity and the ways to combat them.
Like Heinlein said in Starship Troopers -- the race that doesn't expand and conquer will get wiped out by the race that does. Nature's a bitch that way.
--Jonah
Posted by Styrofoaman (Member # 706) on :
election year pandering at best, an attempt to kill NASA outright at worse. Scrap our current launch system before the next one is ready years after Bush leaves office? Hmmmm.... Somthing stinks and it ain't this slice of cheese I'm eating.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Like Heinlein said in Starship Troopers -- the race that doesn't expand and conquer will get wiped out by the race that does. Nature's a bitch that way."
Well, humans are, anyway. And it's The Paradigm of 4X games, so he must have had some inside info. But, not to be snarky here, that doesn't mean we should blindly comform to his ideology. After all, while we may remember Columbus and Magellan, we also remember the Incans and the native Americans.
I'm not saying we should sit this one out forever, but there are other fundamental stakes that at the very least merit more than just a casual glance, IMO.
[ January 18, 2004, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: Cartman ]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"The people who said the Earth was flat stayed behind in Eurasia."
I hope you're not referring to the inexplicably widespread belief that people thought the world was flat right up until Columbus set foot in the US (which, of course, he never did, either).
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
quote:Originally posted by Balaam Xumucane:
I'll find those WMD yet.
Posted by Tora Ziyal (Member # 53) on :
quote:Our world would be a damn sight different if Columbus and those guys had stayed home
Yeah, the Aztec and Incan civilizations would still exist, and the American Indian population would still number in the tens of millions.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
But...the American Indians would have eventually traveled across the ocean and oppressed England! We'd all have been scalped and Psyliam's "rougish hair" would be adorning the saddlebag of some Navajo chief.
Al Gore might never have invented the Internet!
Think of the children, Ziyal!
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"...Psyliam's "rougish hair" would be adorning the saddlebag of some Navajo chief."
If we ever invent a time travel device, that is just by far the most compelling argument to change history with it. B)
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Or we could just dump Liam in the middle of the Battle of Little Big Horn (and, yes, I know that wasn't the Navajo, so don't nitpick).
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Would they have? They were a long way from the tech level and resource impoverishment Europe was dealing with in the 15th century... But go back further than that.
The Norse founded colonies in Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland, but pulled them all out again later. There is some sketchy evidence that they made it at least as far South as Central America (maybe the basis of the Qetzalcoatl myth?).
Around -- what was it -- the 10th century, I think, the Chinese emperors decided there was nothing worth risking further eastward exploration across the Pacific, so they stopped the extended voyages that in short order would have led to the Chinese discovery of Alaska and Hawaii.
And there are ruins of a roughly 3rd century B.C. Phoenician settlement in Ohio (I think that was the state...). But they obviously didn't find anything here to justify continued round trips.
And through all this time the aboriginal peoples of the Americas didn't build anything much larger than war canoes. The Plains Indians were fighting each other on and off for centuries without any sort of significant technological development beyond the bow. No forged iron or steel. No gunpowder for rockets, cannon, or firearms. Ironic that nowadays, Indian reservations are the best places to go in the U.S. to get fireworks...
But for the present issue -- write to the person you plan on voting for. Write to their running mate. Write to your congresspeople -- senators and representatives. Let them know that whatever happens, and whoever ends up in the Oval Office, you want this program and its funding to continue on schedule. Join a space group, Like the Planetary Society or even just a local one ('round here we have the Orange County Space Society). You can stay up-to-date and also better organize write-in campaigns, like the one that saved New Horizons.
--Jonah
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Bowing out of the argument for a sec: There's actually a fun book by Orson Scott Card on this subject. The historical facts even seem pretty researched. Pastwatch
Mind you, I don't actually think the results of the plot/intervention are realistic, in fact it might be the kind of thing that Omega might be thrilled to death about. But still, its a worthwhile read.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"And there are ruins of a roughly 3rd century B.C. Phoenician settlement in Ohio (I think that was the state...)."
Where did you hear that?
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Our world would be a damn sight different if Columbus and those guys had stayed home
Yeah, the Aztec and Incan civilizations would still exist, and the American Indian population would still number in the tens of millions.
Yeah, those were two benevolent civilizations that had nothing but goodness, mercy and a love for mother nature.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
If one were so inclined, one could make the argument that Western Civilization as a whole would drown all Meso-American/idiginous cultures in a pissing contest for badness, malice and sheer natural destruction.
But so far as we know there are no indigenous species to oppress or convert in space. I don't know why we'd even bother. I suppose all this pent up manifest destiny has to go somewhere.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
@Peregrinus: No offence, but Phoenician settlements on the American continent - no matter in what country or state - is total BS!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
?