The Creature That Ate Nasa Takes Another Big Bite |
The Creature That Ate Nasa Takes Another Big Bite |
Guest_BruceMoomaw_* |
Feb 7 2006, 06:13 AM
Post
#16
|
Guests |
QUOTE (The Messenger @ Feb 7 2006, 03:56 AM) I think we should just de-annex Texas and give it back to Mexico - Manned Space Program and all. Texans keep leading us into wars they don't know how to end. Great minds think alike. I have long thought that when I become Lord Protector of the United States, that will be my very first action during the few years before I end my entirely benevolent dictatorship (having imposed at least a dozen Constitutional reforms that singlehandedly save America), and then retire modestly to my country estate. |
|
|
Guest_BruceMoomaw_* |
Feb 7 2006, 06:47 AM
Post
#17
|
Guests |
I'm still slogging through the 2007 NASA budget -- I haven't read the sections on manned spaceflight at all yet -- but here's what I notice about the space science budget:
(1) The two parts of the science program that really got the hell zapped out of them were the Mars program and non-solar space astronomy. Over $2 billion has been cut out of the Mars program between now and FY 2009 by eliminating not only the Telecom Orbiter but Bush's proposed line of "Mars Testbed" missions to study the environmental and engineering problems associated with manned Mars missions, which are obviously now WAY on the back burner. Mars sample return has also been bumped into the indefinite future -- not surprisingly, since the new mission schedule shows it being delayed from 2016 to 2024. "Navigator" (the extrasolar planets program) has had $629 million cut out of it during the same period by delaying SIM (the crucial first step in the search for nearby Earthlike planets) at least 3 years into 2015 and delaying Terrestrial Planet Finder indefinitely (sensibly, since its basic design hinges crucially on SIM's findings). SOFIA (the 2.5-meter IR telescope carried on a Boeing 747) is teetering on the brink of cancellation, and the entire "Beyond Einstein" program of major cosmology and high-energy astronomy missions (staring with Constellation-X, LISA, and the Joint Dark Energy Mission) has been cancelled pending major reappraisal. Granted that part of this is to compensate for both the addition of a possible Shuttle Hubble repair mission in Dec. 2007 or later, and the continuing huge cost overruns of the Webb Telescope ($515 million more through FY 2010, with its launch delayed two years into 2013). (2) There have been surprisingly few cuts in the Earth Sciences and climate-change observation program -- although the Administration's abortive attempt to zap those last year has led to a 1-year launch delay in several climate-change satellites -- and the solar astronomy and magnetosphere program is holding its own quite well. In fact, spending through FY 2010 on ground-based and suborbital Earth-Sun Connection research has been raised by $264 million through FY 2010, possibly due to the influence of Mikulski the Terrible (who sounded quite content with the new NASA budget in her press release today). (3) Besides the cancellation of any new start for Europa Orbiter, a very big chunk has been cut out of the Discovery program -- and little of this is due to the fact that Dawn is now on hold. I don't know what's going on, although the budget rises again in 2010. (By the way, Kepler's budget has now ballooned to fully $520 million! It would be a dead duck if it hadn't been moved to the Universe Division, which now considers it a mandatory mission.) There has been virtually no change in the New Frontiers budget, although last year's delay of the next AO till 2008 is holding. |
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 08:17 AM
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 477 Joined: 2-March 05 Member No.: 180 |
Geez, at this rate, New Horizons won't have to worry about whether or not it's exploring a planet or Kupier Belt object named Pluto - it'll have to worry about whether or not it still has any budget money allocated to it by the time it gets there.
Yeah, everyone likes seeing people in space. But then, plenty of people also like getting completely drunk. It seems like fun, but it doesn't really accomplish anything. Robots can do the job, maybe not at the pace we'd like, but the price is right. Send a human to Mars for a half trillion to a trillion dollars to do some tests in person. For that money, you could send a few hundred specialized MERs. (Not feasible, just an illustration.) I really hope the next administration gives new life to the Terrestrial Planet Finder and especially Europa missions. Lets just hope that the MSL won't be next. Turn out that 2009 comes and there's no money allocated for the launch because the shuttle needed additional upgrades or something. |
|
|
Guest_Analyst_* |
Feb 7 2006, 09:04 AM
Post
#19
|
Guests |
Let's summarize the solar system exploration program:
Discovery missions: - last new selection 2001/2002! (Dawn and Kepler), the first one is delayed at best, the latter now another program - 11th AO > no selection (Why?) - 12th AO pending since when? - a program that should give us (and did!) about one mission per year has no new mission selected for more than four years now, only MESSENGER is flying right now (I doubt Deep Impact or Stardust will be used again, considering their blurry cameras with limited use) - Delta II will not be around after about 2009, EELVs more expensive New Frontiers: - 1st launched after much, much fighting (New Horizons) - 2nd (Juno) selected in 2005 for launch in 2009, only to be delayed to 2010 or 2011 or? a few months later - next selecting 2008 ??? Cornerstone missions: - last selection Cassini, 1990? - nothing new, only talk and pretty presentations - Europa orbiter, Neptune orbiter, Titan lander: forget it for the next 15 years - this is why I supported, contrary to Bruce, New Horizons 2: better fly that you can get now than waiting for the great Neptune orbiter and Triton lander never to come Mars exploration: - extended (cheap) missions of MGS, Odyssey and MER - MRO launched - Phoenix and one MSL on track, I hope - MTO canceled - no second MSL in 2011 or 2013, only one Scout mission each window at best (nothing clear today), no new orbiter till 2011 at the earliest - current secured (?) program ends with MSL - sample return after 2020!, at the time of MPF (1997) it was planned for 2005 (not realistic even then) Other: - LRO, launch 2008, I have my doubt about this timeframe What is ESA doing? - SMART at the moon - MEX extended mission, camera can't get the super sesolution images promised (Why?) - VEX launched - Rosetta with lander on it's way, the only cornerstone mission after Cassini - ExoMars in 2011, rover with a little more capability than MER, miles to go - Beppi Columbo pending, no lander (would be the next cornerstone mission) It's not as worse (yet) as in the 1980ies (only Voyager 2), but much worse than it was looking only a year ago. The Shuttle ate the budget then, CEV etc. does now and will do more in the future. Trust me. NASA is not a high priority in Washington. When VSE was announced 2004 I saw this coming because there was no budget increase. All was to be done within the current budget, more efficient etc. As if all the money has been wasted before and we only needed someone to reallocate it. The same time the DoD budget increases by 30b$ next year! So the money is there, the will is lacking. Btw., space exploration is not a high priority in Europe eighter. Analyst |
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 10:10 AM
Post
#20
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14431 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
QUOTE (Analyst @ Feb 7 2006, 09:04 AM) - MEX extended mission, camera can't get the super sesolution images promised (Why?) Because the super res channel was a last minute botch-job-bolt-on and has suffered bad focus since launch. The images from it are at the PDS - but they're not great. http://www.fpk.tu-berlin.de/forschung/mex/...Performance.pdf One could be negative or positive about the situation - on one side, we've never had it so good.... 3 (+1 en route) functional Mars Orbiters, two working mars rovers, a new lander launching in 2 years and another rover in 4. A spacecraft orbiting Saturn with prospects for a long extended mission. New twin solar observatory about to be launched NH on it's way to Pluto Ulysses and Voyager 1+2 still giving good data Samples returned from a Comet for study for decades to come A new Lunar orbiter in early phase planning Mission en route to land on a comet and orbit mercury etc etc BUT - one could also be quite negative... Nothing on the board for beyond Jupiter in the forseable future MSR seemingly accelerating it's progress down the calender to the 2020's. No dedicated Mars comms assets ( but then nothing apart from MSL that might need it on the board ) Little progress with the Discovery program An asteroid mission on 'rain check' status Hayabusa in questionable status etc etc Basically - consider it this way - it could be better, and indeed Europa deserves serious attention. But it could be SO much worse. But seing an increase to the US Military budget that is 1875% larger than the total spending for Space Science hurts - a lot. I have no grounds to moan - I don't pay US taxes, this isnt my money - but were I a US citizen, I'd be writing letters. Doug |
|
|
Guest_Myran_* |
Feb 7 2006, 12:14 PM
Post
#21
|
Guests |
Aaaaaaand another bite: This time from the SIM Planetquest and Terrestrial Planet Finder missions. Ok not cancelled, but another delay.
Yahoo news *Sniffles* |
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 12:55 PM
Post
#22
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3419 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Member No.: 15 |
Man -- I had hopes for Griffin. Here we *finally* had someone who was both an accomplished aerospace engineer *and* manager, promising that he could successfully keep the manned and unmanned spaceflight arenas separate and free from financially affecting each other.
I guess he's just another politician -- saying what he thinks his bosses want to hear and not worrying overmuch that he's lying through his teeth. Pardon me, I need to go throw up some more. -the other Doug -------------------- “The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
|
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 12:59 PM
Post
#23
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3419 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Minneapolis, MN, USA Member No.: 15 |
One thing to remember -- the President may propose a budget, but the Congress has to pass it. And Congress is quite famous for making extensive changes to budgets proposed by Presidents.
As long as they're not worried about actually collecting anywhere near as much money as they spend back there in Washington, why don't all of us American members of the forum get in touch with our Congresscritters and tell them that funding for unmanned spaceflight, taken out of the budget by the White House, *must* be restored? Hey, it's worth a shot... -the other Doug -------------------- “The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
|
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 01:50 PM
Post
#24
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2997 Joined: 30-October 04 Member No.: 105 |
QUOTE I have long thought that when I become Lord Protector of the United States, that will be my very first action during the few years before I end my entirely benevolent dictatorship (having imposed at least a dozen Constitutional reforms that singlehandedly save America), and then retire modestly to my country estate. Don't. That strategy in not working now. The current US administration will be history in a couple of years and perhaps sanity will return to the US space program. Hopefully the current productive missions can keep a status quo and the future missions en-route will be OK when they arrive. And griffin will become a phoenix. Although the Lunar missions were a fantastic accomplishment, they were to a certain extent cold war politics; once we "beat the Russians" some of the drive went out and we drifted to the Space Winnebago program... Sorry for the rant. --Bill -------------------- |
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 02:05 PM
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 510 Joined: 17-March 05 From: Southeast Michigan Member No.: 209 |
QUOTE (dvandorn @ Feb 7 2006, 07:59 AM) One thing to remember -- the President may propose a budget, but the Congress has to pass it. Exactly - judging from all the stuff I've been hearing on the radio, this budget proposal isn't going down well, even with some Republicans. This is just a "blueprint" given to congress by the executive branch. The budget that congress eventually passes may be quite different. With this being an election year, and given the pork factor, those congress people up for re-election won't want to piss off their constituents. So, like dvandorn suggests, it would be a good idea for those of us who live in areas where the unmanned space industry has a big economic presence should write to their representatives and senators and express their concern. -------------------- --O'Dave
|
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 02:23 PM
Post
#26
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14431 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
Has the NASA slice of the pie been altered much during 'processing' of the budget in years past? It's such a small slice of 2T$ that I can't imagine it would get that much attention apart from a brief glance from the politicians who have a local interest in each NASA center or major contractor.
Doug |
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 02:58 PM
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 510 Joined: 17-March 05 From: Southeast Michigan Member No.: 209 |
Yes, it does seem like just "noise" at that level, and the social programs getting cuts (or rather, a "decrease in the increase" as I heard one spin doctor put it), will definitely get much more attention in the process. But writing a letter or e-mail to a congress person is still worth it - we're at least trying to do something.
But what we really need is a good lobbyist. [Gets out rolodex and starts flipping] Hmmm...where is it....Abramoff, Abramoff... -------------------- --O'Dave
|
|
|
Guest_PhilCo126_* |
Feb 7 2006, 06:26 PM
Post
#28
|
Guests |
Well (unmanned) spaceflight may not be a priority in Europe but for the smaller countries the difference in Space budget and Military budget isn't as big as in the USA !
|
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 07:51 PM
Post
#29
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2454 Joined: 8-July 05 From: NGC 5907 Member No.: 430 |
QUOTE (ljk4-1 @ Feb 6 2006, 09:36 AM) What if we could combine the best of humans and machines to allow a presence on other worlds exceeding anything that either alone could accomplish and sense. There is also the possibility of genetically engineering humans to survive in all sorts of extraterrestrial environments. Reinventing Humanity Ray Kurzweil 02/03/2006 ************************* Ray Kurzweil sees a radical evolution of the human species in the next 40 years. The merger of man and machine, coupled with the sudden explosion in machine intelligence and rapid innovation in gene research and nanotechnology, will result in a world where there is no distinction between the biological and the mechanical, or between physical and virtual reality. http://www.kurzweilai.net/email/artRedirec...rtID=635&m=7610 ************************* Technology and Human Enhancement John Smart 02/03/2006 ************************* Machines are increasingly exceeding us in the performance of more and more tasks, from guiding objects like missiles or satellites to assembling other machines. They are merging with us ever more intimately and are learning how to reconfigure our biology in new and significantly faster technological domains. http://www.kurzweilai.net/email/artRedirec...rtID=637&m=7610 “Man is an artifact designed for space travel. He is not destined to remain in his present biologic state any more than a tadpole is destined to remain a tadpole.” - William Burroughs Ray Kurzweil, The Futurist March-April 2006 http://www.kurzweilai.net/email/artRedirec...tID=635&m=13190 The Future of Human-Machine Intelligence We stand on the threshold of the most profound and transformative event in the history of humanity, the "Singularity." What is the Singularity? From my perspective, the Singularity is a future period during which the pace of technological change will be so fast and far-reaching that human existence on this planet will be irreversibly altered. We will combine our brain power-the knowledge, skills, and personality quirks that make us human-with our computer power in order to think, reason, communicate, and create in ways we can scarcely even contemplate today. This merger of man and machine, coupled with the sudden explosion in machine intelligence and rapid innovation in the fields of gene research as well as nanotechnology, will result in a world where there is no distinction between the biological and the mechanical, or between physical and virtual reality. These technological revolutions will allow us to transcend our frail bodies with all their limitations. Illness, as we know it, will be eradicated. Through the use of nanotechnology, we will be able to manufacture almost any physical product upon demand, world hunger and poverty will be solved, and pollution will vanish. Human existence will undergo a quantum leap in evolution. We will be able to live as long as we choose. The coming into being of such a world is, in essence, the Singularity. How is it possible we could be so close to this enormous change and not see it? The answer is the quickening nature of technological innovation. In thinking about the future, few people take into consideration the fact that human scientific progress is exponential: It expands by repeatedly multiplying by a constant (10 to times 10 times 10 and so on) rather than linear; that is, expanding by repeatedly adding a constant (10 plus 10 plus 10, and so on). I emphasize the exponential-versus-linear perspective because it's the most important failure that prognosticators make in considering future trends. Our forebears expected what lay ahead of them to resemble what they had already experienced, with few exceptions. Because they lived during a time when the rate of technological innovation was so slow as to be unnoticeable, their expectations of an unchanged future were continually fulfilled. Today, we have witnessed the acceleration of the curve. Therefore, we anticipate continuous technological progress and the social repercussions that follow. We see the future as being different from the present. But the future will be far more surprising than most people realize, because few observers have truly internalized the implications of the fact that the rate of change is itself accelerating. Exponential growth starts out slowly and virtually unnoticeably, but beyond the knee of the curve it turns explosive and profoundly transformative. My models show that we are doubling the paradigm-shift rate for technology innovation every decade. In other words, the twentieth century was gradually speeding up to today's rate of progress; its achievements, therefore, were equivalent to about 20 years of progress at the rate of 2000. We'll make another "20 years" of progress in just 14 years (by 2014), and then do the same again in only seven years. To express this another way, we won't experience 100 years of technological advance in the twenty-first century; we will witness on the order of 20,000 years of progress (again, when measured by today's progress rate), or progress on a level of about 1,000 times greater than what was achieved in the twentieth century. FULL ESSAY at http://www.kurzweilai.net/email/artRedirec...tID=635&m=13190 -------------------- "After having some business dealings with men, I am occasionally chagrined,
and feel as if I had done some wrong, and it is hard to forget the ugly circumstance. I see that such intercourse long continued would make one thoroughly prosaic, hard, and coarse. But the longest intercourse with Nature, though in her rudest moods, does not thus harden and make coarse. A hard, sensible man whom we liken to a rock is indeed much harder than a rock. From hard, coarse, insensible men with whom I have no sympathy, I go to commune with the rocks, whose hearts are comparatively soft." - Henry David Thoreau, November 15, 1853 |
|
|
Feb 7 2006, 08:42 PM
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 477 Joined: 2-March 05 Member No.: 180 |
QUOTE (djellison @ Feb 7 2006, 05:10 AM) But seing an increase to the US Military budget that is 1875% larger than the total spending for Space Science hurts - a lot. I have no grounds to moan - I don't pay US taxes, this isnt my money - but were I a US citizen, I'd be writing letters. Doug Sometimes writing letters just seems futile. My sister regularly writes a few Congressman, and I see the letters she gets back - standardized form letters "signed" with a copy of the person's signature, and they usually amount to saying "Gee, it's too bad you feel that way about my policies. Please vote for me anyway." The military spending is sickening, especially after hearing politicians lying about "Oh no, it won't be expensive, and it won't take very long at all," which they'll say even as they're asking Congress for a few hundred billion dollars more. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 03:41 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. |