You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Sorry, they didn't release any pics but I read they submitted a proposal (and why should they drop out?).
What I would really like to know is if t/space made a bid...
No, surely Boeing/et al. have already submitted it... please tell me that Lockheeds' crazy ship isn't the winner by default.
Don't worry. Northrop Grumman/Boeing submitted a proposal as well and it looks a lot better (it's a capsule). Lockheed's crazy design won't be selected anyway. Griffin will never allow that.
"Collapse" in the sense that the China of today, ruled by a corrupt and illegitimate regime will cease to exist.
Well said, Cobra
If there is a new super power on the horizon it's India.
China will either become a democracy or collapse, maybe both. Totalitarian regimes only look clean and efficient from the outside inside they're rotting away. Corruption is a huge problem in China.
China is the hype of the decade.
The funding required to keep Voyager going is insignificant. It would be foolish to cancel the mission. Finding the money for Hubble will be a problem, I agree.
Griffin said yesterday any plans to cancel Voyager would be carefully reviewed. I think it is very unlikely they will be cancelled under his watch.
I think we need an HLV (shuttle-derived or EELV-derived, whatever is cheaper both in development and operation) and Griffin has indicated he views this capability as critical.
I also hope NASA develops the lunar hardware with Mars missions in mind (again Griffin has indicated that's what he wants to do), so there won't be a huge gap between a return to the Moon and the first landing on Mars.
NASA should use the Moon primarily as a test-bed and then let the private sector gradually take over. Private companies could exploit the Moon's ressources or develop lunar solar power. For NASA to move on to Mars they will need an HLV so they should develop one now. It will make lunar exploration easier and it will make it virtually impossible to cancel the VSE.
They got their political benefit from the announcements, and ignored it from then on, and put off doing anything real until the 2009 administration.
They ignored it? That's news to me. What about Bush's veto threat when the FY 2005 budget was in trouble (no other president has ever done anything like that for NASA) or Tom DeLay's threat not to let the House vote on a any budget resolution that didn't include the $16.2 billion (a solid 5% increase over 2004) Bush requested? In the end NASA got the full increase. That would never have happended without the strong support from the White House and Republicans in Congress.
What about the selection of Michael Griffin as NASA administrator (A selection Zubrin himself has praised)?
What about the proposed increase in the NASA budget for 2006?
BTW: What "political benefit" did Bush get from the announcement? The plan was widely criticized by democrats and in the media. If anything it probably cost him votes.
Bush has done more for the space program than any other president since JFK. To say otherwise is just ignorant.
"So my question, is there a moon planning committee as well or any other planet or solar system exploration planning effort other than this one?"
I suppose you have heard of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate? http://www.exploration.nasa.gov/]ESMD
What are you people talking about? NASA got its biggest budget increase in years (5,6% or more than $800 million) and a new vision and you're still complaining? ???
Pages: 1