Space Shuttle Columbia

[Future Guy]

The closing words of the movie Apollo 13 ring in my ears at times like these:

"I look at the moon, and I wonder: when will we be going back? And who will that be?"

 

[WDW Monorail]

The closing words of the movie Apollo 13 ring in my ears at times like these:

"I look at the moon, and I wonder: when will we be going back? And who will that be?"

Not the United States.

This is a sad day in American history because of the deaths of 7 brave explorers on this date and also because it is the day the backbone of an agency with the most profound effect on mankind has been broken. Manned space flight stands for everything for which Americans exist. To be independent; to be free of bounds, including the bounds of the atmosphere and the restraint of gravity.
Maybe America no longer stands for that? :shrug:

 

[Rabflmom]

NASA should indeed be pushing boundaries, but that in no way means there isn't a place and need for Ares. Everything doesn't have to be cutting-edge technology to get the job done. NASA should properly retain a manned space exploration program, and that certainly includes continued ability by to get an astronaut into space without foreign or commercial launches. Don't cut Ares without a alternative launch vehicle in the pipeline, in a similar time frame (the shuttle-Ares gap was going to be bad enough).

Since the announcement my questions are.....Are we just turning over the Space Station that we funded for all these years? We won't even have a way to get there without relying on other countries and what if our "friends" in space aren't our friends anymore? It could happen....

Are we willing to take a back seat in space? let the Soviet Union, China Ghana, and the rest who are launching rockets now lead the way?

How expensive will it be to send all our spy and weather satellites up in disposable rockets like Delta and Atlas rockets? Will they make it to the exact spot we want them in like we could do with the manned shuttle and the arm to put them there?

Leaning so much toward commercial space will only make it more dangerous and risky as far as I am concerned and they might not choose Florida to launch from. Will commercial locations be as safety conscious and safe distance from communities if the commercial rocket explodes? How will the companies be supervised so they don't cause friction with other countries etc...

So many questions and very frightening if you live on the space coast.

 

[Rabflmom]

Since the announcement my questions are.....Are we just turning over the Space Station that we funded for all these years? We won't even have a way to get there without relying on other countries and what if our "friends" in space aren't our friends anymore? It could happen....

Are we willing to take a back seat in space? let the Soviet Union, China Ghana, and the rest who are launching rockets now lead the way?

How expensive will it be to send all our spy and weather satellites up in disposable rockets like Delta and Atlas rockets? Will they make it to the exact spot we want them in like we could do with the manned shuttle and the arm to put them there?

Leaning so much toward commercial space will only make it more dangerous and risky as far as I am concerned and they might not choose Florida to launch from. Will commercial locations be as safety conscious and safe distance from communities if the commercial rocket explodes? How will the companies be supervised so they don't cause friction with other countries etc...

So many questions and very frightening if you live on the space coast.

Not as bad as I understood it to be.....so please disregard the post. I can't delete it. Found out that they will still be going to the space station using apollo or Delta rockets some how???? or using a commercial built manned flight vehicle that they say could be built before they could get Aries up. Think they would still fly out of the Cape.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Not as bad as I understood it to be.....so please disregard the post. I can't delete it. Found out that they will still be going to the space station using apollo or Delta rockets some how???? or using a commercial built manned flight vehicle that they say could be built before they could get Aries up. Think they would still fly out of the Cape.

Apollo is dead. Delta could do it, but it would need a capsule.


I think Ares would work, they have that tested.

 

[CDavid]

Not as bad as I understood it to be.....so please disregard the post. I can't delete it. Found out that they will still be going to the space station using apollo or Delta rockets some how???? or using a commercial built manned flight vehicle that they say could be built before they could get Aries up. Think they would still fly out of the Cape.

Actually I think you had it right the first time. The vague suggestion that somehow, maybe, possibly U.S. astronauts might travel on foreign or commercial manned launches (which do not yet exist) into orbit strikes me as spin meant to put a positive face on a very bad idea. This would effectively mean the end of NASA's manned space exploration program, but if you mention that, proponents of this half-baked plan can immediately counter with vague ideas - but no concrete plans - of how we might still participate in manned space flight.

Apollo or Delta manned launches aren't happening. I'm hardly that knowledgeable on the subject, but are there actually any safe, reliable commercial manned spacecraft (capable of reaching the ISS, at a minimum) far enough along in development that they could be ready before Ares, which has been in development for several years now and indeed already had a test launch? If being over budget and behind schedule is cause for being canceled, then the Space Shuttle shouldn't have been built either, nor should most military weapons programs.

But there is a far more compelling reason to keep Ares in the budget. It's a U.S. spacecraft. What happened to pride in your country? I'm pleased to see the International Space Station nearing completion with U.S.-Russian cooperation, and when the Chinese land on the moon I'll be genuinely excited, but I really want to see the United States doing these things itself.

In the early 1970's we could land a man on the moon, and indeed one of the chief Apollo designer s Werner Von Braun wanted to "scale up" the technology to reach Mars back then. Forty years later, with the shuttle retirement, if Ares gets canceled the U.S. will have lost the capability to (at least independently) even put a man into orbit. That's so far beyond sad it needs a new word.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Actually I think you had it right the first time. The vague suggestion that somehow, maybe, possibly U.S. astronauts might travel on foreign or commercial manned launches (which do not yet exist) into orbit strikes me as spin meant to put a positive face on a very bad idea. This would effectively mean the end of NASA's manned space exploration program, but if you mention that, proponents of this half-baked plan can immediately counter with vague ideas - but no concrete plans - of how we might still participate in manned space flight.

Apollo or Delta manned launches aren't happening. I'm hardly that knowledgeable on the subject, but are there actually any safe, reliable commercial manned spacecraft (capable of reaching the ISS, at a minimum) far enough along in development that they could be ready before Ares, which has been in development for several years now and indeed already had a test launch? If being over budget and behind schedule is cause for being canceled, then the Space Shuttle shouldn't have been built either, nor should most military weapons programs.

But there is a far more compelling reason to keep Ares in the budget. It's a U.S. spacecraft. What happened to pride in your country? I'm pleased to see the International Space Station nearing completion with U.S.-Russian cooperation, and when the Chinese land on the moon I'll be genuinely excited, but I really want to see the United States doing these things itself.

In the early 1970's we could land a man on the moon, and indeed one of the chief Apollo designer s Werner Von Braun wanted to "scale up" the technology to reach Mars back then. Forty years later, with the shuttle retirement, if Ares gets canceled the U.S. will have lost the capability to (at least independently) even put a man into orbit. That's so far beyond sad it needs a new word.

:sohappy::sohappy::sohappy::sohappy::sohappy:


Agreed in full. This county can do this, we've done it before.

I think that Ares is flight ready, though, it might still need a capsule. Perhaps this is where funds are going, instead of the Orion rocket?

 

[fyn]

Thought this might be interesting. Phil, the astronomer I linked to in an earlier post, gave a quick update on his blog after his post about the new budget:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/b...udget-unveiled/comment-page-2/#comment-243645

I am on a telecon right now with several space companies, and they all are looking at putting people into orbit around 2013-2014, and it will cost roughly $20 million per person. Assuming no delays either with them, or if NASA goes ahead with Ares, this is a solid year ahead of when NASA can put people in orbit after the Shuttle retires.

I stand by my statement in the post and in earlier posts. Private companies will be putting people in orbit long before NASA will be able to after the Shuttle retires.


And, he points out that civilian spacecraft isn't going to get us to the moon anytime soon, but we won't be paying other countries to get our astronauts into orbit.

 

[RiversideBunny]

There's no point in going back to the moon, particularly at such great expense.
Been there; done that. Move on to greater things. There's a lot more space to explore.

It's my opinion that unmanned exploration and telemetery are more cost effective, and faster, and can cover a much greater area and depth of space.
The United States can be the leader in that.

We need to look at cosmology and the bigger picture.

:king:

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

There's no point in going back to the moon, particularly at such great expense.
Been there; done that. Move on to greater things. There's a lot more space to explore.

It's my opinion that unmanned exploration and telemetery are more cost effective, and faster, and can cover a much greater area and depth of space.
The United States can be the leader in that.

We need to look at cosmology and the bigger picture.

:king:

:brick:


No, finding out about both the origins of the Earth and our Solar System are not important.:wave:



:lol:

 

[fyn]

There's no point in going back to the moon, particularly at such great expense.
Been there; done that. Move on to greater things. There's a lot more space to explore.

It's my opinion that unmanned exploration and telemetery are more cost effective, and faster, and can cover a much greater area and depth of space.
The United States can be the leader in that.

We need to look at cosmology and the bigger picture.

:king:

There's no point to going back to the moon? But we didn't do anything when we first went. We got there first, planted a flag, and left. The moon is perhaps the biggest research opportunity we have right now! I'm right there with you on the efficiencies of unmanned exploration in the rest of the solar system, but the moon is literally one big scientific gold mine hanging in our backyard.

 

[rsoxguy]

There's no point to going back to the moon? But we didn't do anything when we first went. We got there first, planted a flag, and left. The moon is perhaps the biggest research opportunity we have right now! I'm right there with you on the efficiencies of unmanned exploration in the rest of the solar system, but the moon is literally one big scientific gold mine hanging in our backyard.

Hey fyn, would you accept my apology? When I read the things that you have said on this thread, I realize that you are clearly passionate about our Nation's space program. I misspoke in my initial post, and then I misread your reaction to that post. Please accept my humble apology.

 

[fyn]

Hey fyn, would you accept my apology? When I read the things that you have said on this thread, I realize that you are clearly passionate about our Nation's space program. I misspoke in my initial post, and then I misread your reaction to that post. Please accept my humble apology.

No worries, mate! :wave:

 

[rsoxguy]

No worries, mate! :wave:

Good deal! Thank You. :wave:

 

[Rabflmom]

Thought this might be interesting. Phil, the astronomer I linked to in an earlier post, gave a quick update on his blog after his post about the new budget:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/b...udget-unveiled/comment-page-2/#comment-243645

I am on a telecon right now with several space companies, and they all are looking at putting people into orbit around 2013-2014, and it will cost roughly $20 million per person. Assuming no delays either with them, or if NASA goes ahead with Ares, this is a solid year ahead of when NASA can put people in orbit after the Shuttle retires.

I stand by my statement in the post and in earlier posts. Private companies will be putting people in orbit long before NASA will be able to after the Shuttle retires.


And, he points out that civilian spacecraft isn't going to get us to the moon anytime soon, but we won't be paying other countries to get our astronauts into orbit.

Am I the only one that worries that letting commercial companies ( read that companies in the business to make a profit) will overlook dangerous, things that could endanger us all in the long run? Who says an American or foreign CEO would check out a person/company willing to pay them a huge amount of money to put up a satellite that could in the end destroy our country, kill millions of people, spy on us, etc. I personally don't think commercial companies should be in space exploration. Who will limit the companies and the flights that leave junk in space?
Will commercial companies be as tedious/safe on each aspect of flight?

And I agree with the previous poster.....where is American Pride? Remember in the 60s when Russia was leading in space? The country was devastated that we were behind and rallied to get the program going and it wasn't long before we were caught up and then landing on the moon. We were all so proud of the achievement and there is none of that in these plans.

I for one am an American who thinks we have been let down by the President. He is not seeing things in the long run and is being very short sited thinking he is saving money to help the economy. We will pay dearly in the end. JMHO

 

[fyn]

Am I the only one that worries that letting commercial companies ( read that companies in the business to make a profit) will overlook dangerous, things that could endanger us all in the long run? Who says an American or foreign CEO would check out a person/company willing to pay them a huge amount of money to put up a satellite that could in the end destroy our country, kill millions of people, spy on us, etc. I personally don't think commercial companies should be in space exploration. Who will limit the companies and the flights that leave junk in space?
Will commercial companies be as tedious/safe on each aspect of flight?

All of the concerns you have already exist for commercial automobile transportation, commercial marine businesses, and commercial air travel. All of which are regulated, and typically have better safety records than government organizations in the same industry. Space is no different.

 

[Rabflmom]

All of the concerns you have already exist for commercial automobile transportation, commercial marine businesses, and commercial air travel. All of which are regulated, and typically have better safety records than government organizations in the same industry. Space is no different.

Hope you are right. I really am more afraid of other aspects than just the safety of getting them up there. <g> Maybe I just read too much science fiction???? But I worry that something could go really wrong. LOL

 

[puntagordabob]

The President's budget plan does not include money for NASA.

But we can give Trillion of dollars of aid to foreign countries that in most cases despises the USA... Please DONT get me started!!!!! Space is our future... and look at the technological advances that came from it... and the money our US companies made from marketing it.. I guess the Chinese and the Russian space programs are smiling with big Grins right now at our stupidity.

I wonder what Walt would think of this?.....?.......??????

 

[RiversideBunny]

The President's budget plan does not include money for NASA.

The NASA overall budget has actually been increased.
The manned program for a return to the moon was shelved but not money for NASA.

From a web site-
The U.S. space agency's ambitious plan to put astronauts back on the moon has been cancelled in the Obama administration's proposed 2011 federal budget. ...

NASA's budget would actually increase by $6 billion over the next five years under the plan. But that amount falls far short of what it would need to support the estimated $81 billion Constellation program, aimed at returning astronauts to the moon by 2020. The costly program has been fraught with budget overruns and delayed by technical challenges with the design and testing of NASA's new Aeries 1 launch vehicle.

 

[rsoxguy]

But we can give Trillion of dollars of aid to foreign countries that in most cases despises the USA... Please DONT get me started!!!!! Space is our future... and look at the technological advances that came from it... and the money our US companies made from marketing it.. I guess the Chinese and the Russian space programs are smiling with big Grins right now at our stupidity.

I wonder what Walt would think of this?.....?.......??????

The NASA overall budget has actually been increased.
The manned program for a return to the moon was shelved but not money for NASA.

From a web site-
The U.S. space agency's ambitious plan to put astronauts back on the moon has been cancelled in the Obama administration's proposed 2011 federal budget. ...

NASA's budget would actually increase by $6 billion over the next five years under the plan. But that amount falls far short of what it would need to support the estimated $81 billion Constellation program, aimed at returning astronauts to the moon by 2020. The costly program has been fraught with budget overruns and delayed by technical challenges with the design and testing of NASA's new Aeries 1 launch vehicle.

I would refer you both my apology above.