Goodbye NASA
- Thread starter Steven Biehler
- Start date
Recommended Videos
We're still making manned missions; we're returning to the moon in 2015. Just not in space shuttles.Wicky_42 said:it's the shuttles that are gone, not NASA. Hopefully commercial and private solutions to getting into space will continue progressing and NASA can put their budget into making cooler technology than merely the means to get it up there.
Still, the shuttle was kinda iconic, sad to see it go, but hopeful a better solution will present itself over the next decade. Hopefully before the world ends
Jesus people.
That was a very good trolling. Well done.aba1 said:I'm gonig to take this opportunity to troll
well at least you still got all that money for your army
This sucks because I was hoping to save up to retire on the moon.
Check this out
http://www.moonconnection.com/moon_gravity.phtml
When I'm old a frail, my 300lbs body here will only be 49.8lbs!
But now, because the USA would rather shoot people for oil then have sex in zero-g's, that may not come to pass in my lifetime.
*pouts*
Its budget is getting cut by 1.4%. It's not getting shuttered. It is a crying shame that somehow, the National Endowment for the Arts, which, AFAIK is primarily concerned with paying the talentless for bad art, and the National Endowment for the Humanities, which is similar, could be abolished and no one would miss them, and you could maintain NASA's budget with the savings. SpaceX is so far more efficient than NASA at launching that we can probably do more with the shuttle program gone.
In fact, the current direction of the space program is one of the few things I actually agree with President Obama on. More private companies, more efficiency, less governmental bureaucracy.
Of course, if Congress was smart, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. We wouldn't have spent more than we took in...but neither party feels like doing that when they could buy votes, or regulate industries for fun and profit (of themselves or their cronies...I'm looking at you Immelt).
Spending 787 billion in "stimulus" which didn't help the economy at ALL didn't do anything for our fiscal situation either.
Especially now, as the Iraq war is all but won (and the Iraqis now lead security in all the provinces) - but then again, Pres. Obama just had to go and get involved in two more wars in Libya and Yemen, eh? Oh wait, sorry, "kinetic military actions." Because when you change the name, it's no longer war. My mistake.
In fact, the current direction of the space program is one of the few things I actually agree with President Obama on. More private companies, more efficiency, less governmental bureaucracy.
Of course, if Congress was smart, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. We wouldn't have spent more than we took in...but neither party feels like doing that when they could buy votes, or regulate industries for fun and profit (of themselves or their cronies...I'm looking at you Immelt).
Spending 787 billion in "stimulus" which didn't help the economy at ALL didn't do anything for our fiscal situation either.
Especially now, as the Iraq war is all but won (and the Iraqis now lead security in all the provinces) - but then again, Pres. Obama just had to go and get involved in two more wars in Libya and Yemen, eh? Oh wait, sorry, "kinetic military actions." Because when you change the name, it's no longer war. My mistake.
May I remind you of the european space program? You know, the one that was key to the developement of the international space station?
I can fully understand the nostalgia americans have with NASA, but then again it is a classical sign of american arrogance to assume humanity's future in space would die with the space shuttle programm.
I can fully understand the nostalgia americans have with NASA, but then again it is a classical sign of american arrogance to assume humanity's future in space would die with the space shuttle programm.
As long as there is a monetary system, those "greedy fucks" won't cease to exist. The army isn't fighting them, it's fighting FOR them. Anyway, eet eez sad dei!ultimateownage said:
It is sad; in some ways it feels like the end of an era. But *grimaces* we are really strapped for cash right now. And it's not like we could save if we all "pitched in" a little more--the Republican Party will not stand for tax increases. Just spending cuts. So even though the shuttles are very important to our general advancement...immediate need has put them off until further notice.
As many people have already stated, NASA is not shutting down but the current space shuttle is being retired with the orion shuttle taking it's place (http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2082034,00.html). If things go as planned, they will be able to test flight it by 2013 and, by 2016, manned flights will be going on again (http://www.geekosystem.com/first-orion-capsule-assembled/).Steven Biehler said:
As much as it saddens me (as I really want to see the start of colonization of other planets/moons) it's probably a good thing that there will be a delay between the two. The reason why I believe this is because our generation (anyone younger than 25) wants to see space exploration a reality while the older generations see no point in it. I foresee that, in about 5-10 years, when everyone in our generation can vote, that one of the main issues that the candidates for President will focus on making space exploration back at the forefront in societies to do list.
@Exterminas: agreed, it's a little ridiculous that people think just because NASA is blowing dough on shuttles that humanity's last desperate grasp at space exploration has been snuffed out.
Other than the Mars rovers, NASA is almost a fantastic study in INefficiency, if there were ever a field that could actually benefit from privatization and competitive innovation (and isn't bogged down with the inertia of companies too old and too stubborn to be relevant) it's space exploration. NASA outing of the shuttle program will more likely increase the rate at which we get to space by leaving the way open for people willing to take risks and innovate.
Other than the Mars rovers, NASA is almost a fantastic study in INefficiency, if there were ever a field that could actually benefit from privatization and competitive innovation (and isn't bogged down with the inertia of companies too old and too stubborn to be relevant) it's space exploration. NASA outing of the shuttle program will more likely increase the rate at which we get to space by leaving the way open for people willing to take risks and innovate.
Aww, I always wanted to see a shuttle take off live. I know this'll mean all the more things to look at if I ever visit the Houston museum, but still. Maybe I'll get a look at whatever they switch to. I remember a while back they wanted to send men to Mars. Are they going to be using the replacement shuttle to do that?
because magically, tomorrow is going to be like today, next year is going to be like this year, and next millenia will be like this. Ever consider that as fuel efficiency, more durable alloys, and various other technological improvement becomes available, what we consider the "shuttle" to be would be the equivalent of a horse-and-buggy?
Just because it's the last space shuttle mission for a while doesn't mean it's the end. Give it a rest, right now the economy we are in cannot sustain it. When we bounce back, we may play with the idea of space exploration even more.
Just because it's the last space shuttle mission for a while doesn't mean it's the end. Give it a rest, right now the economy we are in cannot sustain it. When we bounce back, we may play with the idea of space exploration even more.
I'm not really sure why we keep spending ridiculous amounts of money to shoot giant chunks of metal into space just to say we did it.
Maybe once we've actually developed some sort of power source that can actually move us through space fast enough to actually get something done, but as it is now it's a completely pointless waste of money.
Maybe once we've actually developed some sort of power source that can actually move us through space fast enough to actually get something done, but as it is now it's a completely pointless waste of money.
I believe they need it for their debt. If they don't spend that money on some NASA projects, it isn't as if they're going to put it into their army, they could just use it to pay off their massive debt.Russian_Assassin said:Where do you need the $, really (not sarcasm, honest question)? And why isn't the American Government cutting some of the funding for the army?Matt Oliver said:
Oh I forgot, our world isn't about discoveries and transcendence of our species. It's about greedy fucks trying to own the god damn world and make people forget what really matters , making them interested in irrelevant bullshit and ultimately controlling each and every one of us like the cattle that we are. Silly me
Sad news indeed. Faith in humanity -1
I don't really see how that second paragraph applies, you have a troll avatar so I'm just going to pass it aside.
Eugh, all those "losing faith in humanity" comments are old and unoriginal. It's not as if they're discontinuing NASA, they're retiring the shuttle that they've used for the last 20 years. They're expanding past low orbit exploration, leaving that area of space for private companies, and wanting to expand further. They don't have the means to go further yet, and with the country in debt, it's not as if it'll happen tomorrow, so they're in the planning phases. The whole point of the 30 year old mission was the finish building the space station, and they've done that. Oh, but I guess they did that to control us like cattle, huh?
What we really need to worry about is...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/science/07webb.html?_r=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/science/07webb.html?_r=1
Don't know much about what Virgin is doing but unless those companies are actually taking people to the moon, then what they are doing would obviously be less time consuming than NASA.Dr_Horrible said:
Guess what, now American astronauts will be using Russian rocket.
As ironical as it might sound, its true, look it up people.
As ironical as it might sound, its true, look it up people.
I don't always agree with you but I strongly second this. The constant rebuttal to spending money on research in space exploration is "we have so many problems down here we need to fix first." Well I have news for you, we've always had problems and we always will. If we wait until the world is a shining beacon of happiness, equality and freedom to start pondering space travel we never will. Space needs to be taken off the back burner. The sooner we spread out the better our long term survival prospects as a species become. As it stands we've got all of our eggs in one basket and we're fine with that?EverythingIncredible said:
The op is a little confused however. NASA isn't going anywhere. They're just retiring the shuttle program. Too expensive and inefficient. If the VASMIR engine works the way it's supposed to next year it'll make regretting the loss of the old shuttles akin to lamenting the end of the horse and buggy era. Romantic but logically unpopular.
http://www.physorg.com/news174031552.html
I've come to realize that NASA is the shaft of the spear in our efforts to reach space, and private companies are quickly becoming the spearhead. "Going to space" doesn't have any obvious benefits to the government, so NASA is often viewed by lawmakers as a "spaceflight of fancy", regardless of their laundry list of major scientific advancements and achievements.
Oh, and NASA isn't shutting down. The shuttle program is (developing the new, more powerful spacecrafts is their new focus).
Oh, and NASA isn't shutting down. The shuttle program is (developing the new, more powerful spacecrafts is their new focus).