Nasa Manned Spaceflight Funding, Can NASA afford manned spaceflight? |
Nasa Manned Spaceflight Funding, Can NASA afford manned spaceflight? |
Nov 24 2005, 03:46 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 753 Joined: 23-October 04 From: Greensboro, NC USA Member No.: 103 |
The Washington Post reports in this article that the current US budget shortfalls may force NASA to cut half of the planned manned spaceflights in the coming years. Excerpts from the Post article:
"A large deficit in NASA's troubled shuttle program threatens to seriously delay and possibly cripple President Bush's space exploration initiative unless the number of planned flights is cut virtually in half or the White House agrees to add billions of dollars to the human spaceflight budget." ... Under the budgets projected for the next five years, experts outside and within the Bush administration agree, it will be impossible -- by several billion dollars -- to complete the planned shuttle missions and finish the new spacecraft [CEV] by 2012, or maybe even by 2014...Griffin acknowledged as much at a Nov. 3 House Science Committee hearing, saying the plan to finish the space station and retire the shuttle in 2010 faces a "$3 billion to $5 billion" funding shortfall. A committee document placed the deficit at "nearly $6 billion," and some sources said even that figure could be low. NASA's budget difficulties have also been complicated by having to pay for about $400 million in special projects inserted, mostly by senators, into the agency's 2006 funding. The sources said the White House is juggling several proposals to close the deficit, but one industry source said, "None of the choices are good -- NASA's in a box." ... Several sources confirmed that the budget office in the early negotiations proposed stopping shuttle flights altogether. "It sucks money out of the budget, and it's a dead-end program," one source said. But "that argument's over," another source said. "The political side of the White House said, 'We're keeping it.' If you kill the shuttle right now, it will be heavy lifting for your foreign policy because of the international obligations" around the space station. A proposal under consideration would keep the full complement of shuttle flights -- 18 to finish the space station and one to service the Hubble Space Telescope -- and let completion of the crew exploration vehicle slip to 2014, if necessary, or even beyond. "The president said originally there would be a four-year gap, and that's realistic," one source said. "My personal view, though, is whatever date you set . . . it will slip." -------------------- Jonathan Ward
Manning the LCC at http://www.apollolaunchcontrol.com |
|
|
Nov 26 2005, 12:49 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 1 Joined: 26-November 05 Member No.: 581 |
When you put the foam issue as you just did, it doesn't make any since. However, the payload involved isn't simply unmanned hardware, but humans. Also, NASA knows that funding for the Shuttle will most likely be nonexistent if another accident occurs.
As much as I love manned space flight and support the Vision for Space Exploration, I absolutely DESPISE the notion of taking funding from unmanned spaceflight to fund manned spaceflight. An effective space program has to be balanced. One instance that has recently burned me is the Dawn mission to 1 Ceres and 4 Vesta. Did you know that JPL has been told to stand down with this mission? The solution to NASA's funding shortfalls isn't jiggling the books, but simply receiving more funding from Congress. Unfortunately, there is nothing simple about that. |
|
|
Nov 26 2005, 01:44 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 2262 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Melbourne - Oz Member No.: 16 |
QUOTE (Colby @ Nov 26 2005, 11:49 AM) When you put the foam issue as you just did, it doesn't make any since. However, the payload involved isn't simply unmanned hardware, but humans. Also, NASA knows that funding for the Shuttle will most likely be nonexistent if another accident occurs. As much as I love manned space flight and support the Vision for Space Exploration, I absolutely DESPISE the notion of taking funding from unmanned spaceflight to fund manned spaceflight. An effective space program has to be balanced. One instance that has recently burned me is the Dawn mission to 1 Ceres and 4 Vesta. Did you know that JPL has been told to stand down with this mission? The solution to NASA's funding shortfalls isn't jiggling the books, but simply receiving more funding from Congress. Unfortunately, there is nothing simple about that. The case of Dawn though is not that it hs had money taken away to fund manned spaceflight, but that it's going overbudget. You should read this thread about it. James -------------------- |
|
|
Jan 1 2006, 03:03 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 548 Joined: 19-March 05 From: Princeton, NJ, USA Member No.: 212 |
QUOTE (jamescanvin @ Nov 26 2005, 01:44 AM) The case of Dawn though is not that it hs had money taken away to fund manned spaceflight, but that it's going overbudget. You should read this thread about it. James DAWN is not that much overbudget. Its a great mission that is being held hostage to NASA buget cuts. DAWN is nearly complete and can fly an exciting science mission in 2006 if the funding and manpower is restored. The Discovery cost cap has just been increased and DAWN is within that cap. Also, Lets not forgot that the MER's were also overbudget. anyway, this has been extensively thrashed out in that thread cited above. I agree that we need a balanced program of manned and unmanned. While I strongly support the return to the moon, I think it is TERRIBLE that the unmanned mission budget is being severly cut to support VSE. SEE also Craig Covaults editorial in the 14 Nov 2005 Aviation Week for more perspective http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1075 NASA needs a significant budget increase NOW and the latest news is that Griffin is seeking a 9% increase. Time will tell if he gets it. Otherwise the RIF's will start very soon and NASA science missions will be decimated and everyone loses. about the NY Times, they did not explicitely endorse a NASA budget increase as the early part of the editorial implied. they just laid out the choices if NASA does not get the increase. ken |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th April 2024 - 09:54 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |