Obama eliminates NASA's funds for manned lunar missions

TheGame · 02-02-2010, 03:32 AM

So we should spend endlessly on manned space travel? Has anything been accomplished that was worthwhile for a manned mission in the last 30 years?

I'd agree if you said it's disapointing that this had to be done, but I disagree if you think this is something worth spending on unconditionlly. Almost ALL of the progress we've made have been unmanned missions.

Fox 6 · 02-02-2010, 03:45 AM

USA hasn't been to the moon in decades, do they really need to go back? I agree with scrapping the lunar program for now, it will save billions, which is good for this economic downturn.

TheSlyMoogle · 02-02-2010, 03:51 AM

As explained to bond earlier it was scrapped yes, but is now up for grabs to commercial business. So it's not over, just kinda up grabs in a sense.

I also agree with fox, seriously haven't been doing much with the space program as is, and more fuckups have occurred than success. Which I also said is probably due to lack of funding.

Overall I'm pretty "Eh..." about the whole thing. We'll see how this plays out in the coming years. Probably a bad decision, but at the same time who knows? This could end up being the thing our space program needs. Get some fucking people up in this shit with the money to blow.

All I'm sayin.

Typhoid · 02-02-2010, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGame

So we should spend endlessly on manned space travel? Has anything been accomplished that was worthwhile for a manned mission in the last 30 years?

I'd agree if you said it's disapointing that this had to be done, but I disagree if you think this is something worth spending on unconditionlly. Almost ALL of the progress we've made have been unmanned missions.

You're right. Nothing's been accomplished, therefor nothing shall ever be accomplished again.

I never said "They should put extra funding into it." - simply that they shouldn't drastically cut funding for space exploration. And I said nowhere near "Spend Uncondtionally."

Yes, almost all of the progress has been unmanned. Correct. Humans are obsolete. We should just put robots in charge of everything, forever. I can make gross accusations as to your hidden meanings, aswell.

My point is this: Obama should - instead of cut funding from something entirely, shift the work of the project from a manned mission to the moon, to a manned mission to Mars.

The reason they should go back to the Moon, is to test how building would work out realistically on the Moon, in order to save a ton of money in the future to have a manned Mars mission. It's a fraction of the cost to send a manned mission from the Moon to Mars, than from Earth to Mars.

It's a real pity how little stock people put into Astronomy and Space these days. If it doesn't make them a quick buck, they're out.

Professor S · 02-02-2010, 08:21 AM

Surprisingly, I'm all for this. NASA hasn't done squat in terms of manned flight in 30 years. I think if this is opened to private industry they will make far more leaps forward than NASA will (as long as the government makes it possible by supporting private investment through tax credits and limited regulation).

Besides, I'd prefer NASA concentrate their funds on unmanned exploration and scientific study.

Neo · 02-02-2010, 10:01 AM

This really puts a damper on my hope of establishing a solar empire.

TheGame · 02-02-2010, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Space Exploration is something that should definitely never be canceled or hindered.

ok.

I stand by what I say... and I didn't put words in your mouth. My responce was for anyone who is dissapointed about this change. I'm not sure how to respond to your mix of sarcasm and assumptions that I'm attacking you.

I will say, though.. that unmanned missions can provide a lot of data.. and this isn't a permanent cut to manned missions. This will not slow space exploration down whasoever, the focus will just have to be shiffed to getting data a different way until the economy recovers.

KillerGremlin · 02-02-2010, 11:10 AM

Pretty shallow (and sad...damn you public education!) that a lot of you think nothing has been accomplished with the trips to the moon or space travel in the past 30 years. There has been a lot of medical research that has moved forward as well as progress made in the fields of physics.

The pro of this is we can see space move into the commercial sphere which means more funding which may ultimately be a good thing since commercial space means you'll have competition....Richard Branson and Virgin are already working on their thing. As I understand it, NASA is severely underfunded as is. Perhaps commercial space travel will give way to new innovation or different solutions.

On the other hand, going commercial means you might lose out on a wealth of valuable scholarly research. And yeah, colonizing the moon is hugely important since it is the first step to sending astronauts to other locations in our galaxy. Living in space for long periods of time may have consequences that we cannot yet surmise just from the astronauts who spend extensive time in low-orbit in the space station.

So much research to be done....this is a real shame. The real shame is humanity needs to fund several wars instead of making some real progress for the future of our species.

Professor S · 02-02-2010, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KillerGremlin

Pretty shallow (and sad...damn you public education!) that a lot of you think nothing has been accomplished with the trips to the moon or space travel in the past 30 years. There has been a lot of medical research that has moved forward as well as progress made in the fields of physics.

The pro of this is we can see space move into the commercial sphere which means more funding which may ultimately be a good thing since commercial space means you'll have competition....Richard Branson and Virgin are already working on their thing. As I understand it, NASA is severely underfunded as is. Perhaps commercial space travel will give way to new innovation or different solutions.

On the other hand, going commercial means you might lose out on a wealth of valuable scholarly research. And yeah, colonizing the moon is hugely important since it is the first step to sending astronauts to other locations in our galaxy. Living in space for long periods of time may have consequences that we cannot yet surmise just from the astronauts who spend extensive time in low-orbit in the space station.

So much research to be done....this is a real shame. The real shame is humanity needs to fund several wars instead of making some real progress for the future of our species.

The last manned trip to the moon was in 1972. The trips to the moon were wonderfully effective, but the fact is that we've wasted a lot of funds on trying to get someone to the moon since with no results. Also, I think most of the scientific study and real breakthroughs have come from unmanned space exploration, and if not, they could be with how technology has advanced.

No one is saying to eliminate space exploration, simply adjust it to fit the times, and open more of it up to commercial enterprise. NASA hasn't been to the moon in 37 years. We're still using ancient technology and shuttles to travel to space.

I think Virgin, or someone of that ilk, can do better. Say whatever you will about reasons why NASA has failed, and my answer will always be "1972". NASA's sin a failure of imagination. It's time we put away idealistic nonsense and allow new ideas and methodologies to compete with government control (funding is control) and waste.

Vampyr · 02-02-2010, 12:23 PM

I agree with Prof that we should focus more on unmanned exploration, and that this can potentially be a good thing.

The only things I'm worried about is that we still need to be able to move the technology forward that allows us to live and survive in space. I'm afraid that since the funding for putting people on the moon has stopped, then this technology could be slow to move forward. It would be great if we could continue developing ideas and technology for future use, though.

Another concern is that once you decide to cut something like this, it could be difficult to get it reinstated later.

Typhoid · 02-02-2010, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyr

I'm afraid that since the funding for putting people on the moon has stopped, then this technology could be slow to move forward. It would be great if we could continue developing ideas and technology for future use, though.

Another concern is that once you decide to cut something like this, it could be difficult to get it reinstated later.

*ding ding*