NASA's Future Uncertain?

[Tee Kay]

What exactly? The laws of physics didn't change - you still need powerful rockets, big space ships and many days of travel to reach Moon. We have better materials and much more powerful electronics today, but it didn't change the way space flight works.

Plus, China has not a free access to the latest space technologies, so it either has to steal/copy them or develop them on its own.

It was a totally unacceptable risk by today's standards and it is impossible to do now. Modern space launchers take many years to develop (read the article, it mentions that even NASA is having problems with developing new-generation space launchers), even with computers and new materials. You simply can't compare the cold war situation with present day competition between any of the space powers

I don't think China would aim to build a state-of-the-art, 21st century modern spacecraft like the sort NASA wants to build before sending people to the moon. It's more likely we'll see a modern, modified version of the Soyuz (originally designed for the lunar program anyway) upgraded with modern electronics and system.

China probably won't land a manned mission on the moon in the next ten years, but it's a feat that may be achievable in the near future. The Chinese themselves penciled that in for 2025 - 2030.

And it still doesn't justify the China hype The media only talk about the Chinese plans, they don't mention any specific achievements.

That's because China's plans scares the public more than China's achievements I didn't even know about the Chang'e flight until about six months afterwards while browsing wikipedia.

 

[Zelig]

Extended budget?

Yes.

NASA budget from $17.6 billion to $334 billion, US armed forces budget from $651 billion to $334 billion, overall spending between the two remains the same.

 

[Winner]

Yes.

NASA budget from $17.6 billion to $334 billion, US armed forces budget from $651 billion to $334 billion, overall spending between the two remains the same.

And the US goes bankrupt as planned

 

[GoodGame]

oh well, if NASA can't win funding and has to cut-back service, then Congress should consider tax breaks as incentives to private corps willing to venture into space.

 

[Nylan]

haha I was not aware that NASA had substituted the russians with us europeans in the space race, maybe that is why we are working with the russians as well.

It seems moronic from a NASA standpoint to refuse our help, but maybe it has something to do with NASA being part of their airforce - hence the military wants monopoly.

Actually, the number of ESA and JAXA workers at KSC is quite large. There is very much a sense of international cooperation in the daily grit of things. You're right that the programs could probably be better synchronized than they are, but to suggest that there is anything resembling a monopoly or the desire for one is simply not true. Kennedy Space Center is not an AFB.

 

[EnglishEdward]

even with computers

It was much quicker for Von Braun, they only had simple computers then.

 

[Shaihulud]

I don't think that we should discount China's effort in space exploration, they have come along way since. They have done quite well developing their heavy rockets and space capsules, their plans to go to the moon is modest. Maybe the reason why Winner does not see more of China's space exploration efforts is because the western media does not find it good to print.

 

[exhile]

China plans to put up a space station in 2011 but even their schedule is based upon but's and if's so NASA is not alone on this subject. Russia, from my view seems to be on time with their launches.

 

[Winner]

I don't think that we should discount China's effort in space exploration, they have come along way since. They have done quite well developing their heavy rockets and space capsules, their plans to go to the moon is modest. Maybe the reason why Winner does not see more of China's space exploration efforts is because the western media does not find it good to print.

Name one major Chinese contribution to real space exploration. Something on par with launching a space telescope to search for extrasolar planets or landing a probe on Titan. Just one, please.

Sending people to space is not really exploration of space, they hardly did anything others didn't thousand times before.

 

[Nylan]

Name one major Chinese contribution to real space exploration. Something on par with launching a space telescope to search for extrasolar planets or landing a probe on Titan. Just one, please.

Sending people to space is not really exploration of space, they hardly did anything others didn't thousand times before.

Excellent strawman, good sir. China has come a long way insofar as space exploration capacity is concerned. I don't see how being late to the game makes them automatically not worth consideration. It's not like the ESA can do jack without relying on Roskos or NASA.

 

[Gooblah]

Excellent strawman, good sir. China has come a long way insofar as space exploration capacity is concerned. I don't see how being late to the game makes them automatically not worth consideration. It's not like the ESA can do jack without relying on Roskos or NASA.

Plans are in there to change that though; construction of a spaceport in Guiana and testing of a new rocket are already underway AFAIK.

 

[Nylan]

Indeed, but as it stands right now they are largely dependent. Thus, I agree with Shaihulud's conclusions on the subject. China is not to be discounted.

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

As far as I'm concerned, NASA's days are numbered. The successful launch of SS1 means that private entities can already outperform a government agency on a fraction of the cost. Perhaps in a generation, NASA will be reduced to little more than a regulatory body. Already there are plans to improve on SS1 and sell it as a tourist venture by Virgin Atlantic.

 

[Nylan]

As far as I'm concerned, NASA's days are numbered. The successful launch of SS1 means that private entities can already outperform a government agency on a fraction of the cost. Perhaps in a generation, NASA will be reduced to little more than a regulatory body. Already there are plans to improve on SS1 and sell it as a tourist venture by Virgin Atlantic.

I somehow doubt that. Private space travel still has a very long way to go in not only technology but capital as well. If the USA is having funding problems, how exactly is a private corporation supposed to have the money to out-compete it?

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

I somehow doubt that. Private space travel still has a very long way to go in not only technology but capital as well. If the USA is having funding problems, how exactly is a private corporation supposed to have the money to out-compete it?

I already explained it. SS1 was designed, built, and launched in a shorter time frame and with far less money than the original Space Shuttle. Because the costs are lower, it is far easier for a private firm to do it than the government. It is also far easier to get backers when the project is expected to eventually yield profit.

NASA's projects only yield abstract and occasionally scientific profits, and they must convince funding from Congress based on intangible gains. Many of NASA's projects have been based on political considerations. The race to the moon was motivated by a rivalry with the USSR.

 

[Snorrius]

Considering that US economy will crash during next few years, it is doubtfull NASA will be able to get this "extended" budget.

 

[Nylan]

I already explained it. SS1 was designed, built, and launched in a shorter time frame and with far less money than the original Space Shuttle. Because the costs are lower, it is far easier for a private firm to do it than the government. It is also far easier to get backers when the project is expected to eventually yield profit.

NASA's projects only yield abstract and occasionally scientific profits, and they must convince funding from Congress based on intangible gains. Many of NASA's projects have been based on political considerations. The race to the moon was motivated by a rivalry with the USSR.

I think you greatly undervalue NASA's scientific and commercial value.