Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

Ben Barrett · 2003-09-18 16:04:56

I couldn't help but read the Mars Society bulletin about Zubrin's Op-Ed being read in front of congress. I was optimistic but then I noticed that NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe seemed to completely try to shoot it down. I then logged onto NASA's web site and noticed that they had absolutely no mention of a manned Mars mission where they used to have a whole section dedicated to a probable future manned Mars endeavor. I believe that if we are ever to go beyond Earth orbit in the near future then O'Keefe has to go. He seems more concerned with keeping the statis quo bureaucracy of NASA than real exploration. The real irony is that on NASA's home page they have this flashy animation explaining how NASA's mission is to "Explore the universe, search for life, and inspire the next generation of explorers" and in reality they refuse to do something that would be very substantial in doing so. I'm really starting to miss Dan Goldin. He seemed to have a lot more vision for the future. I'm still optomistic about congress taking notice. Maybe a congressional mandate will get NASA off it's ass and into space where it belongs. This is just me ranting folks, but this is my first time posting anything on this board. So, if you think I'm right in what I'm saying, or if you think I'm completely wrong I'd appreciate your responce.

Ben Barrett, Mars Society Member

Free Spirit · 2003-09-19 00:25:27

Any relation to Shaun Barrett? Like you, I've pretty much resigned myself to the reality that NASA shows its worst colors when engaging in human spaceflight. NASA's robotic missions though are a whole different story. NASA shines in that department. It could live up to its credo of "exploring the way only NASA can" if it put less emphasis on sending people into space and more on developing big robotic missions. I'd prefer a giant, well equipped Mars rover or robotic sample return mission any day over another shuttle launch or new ISS modules.

Shaun Barrett · 2003-09-19 02:27:13

Welcome Ben!
Don't worry too much about ranting. I've been doing it here for quite a while now and, by and large, the other contributors have been very patient with me!!

By the way, that's a mighty fine family name you have there!
:;):

TJohn · 2003-09-19 06:57:25

Two Barretts?? Uh-Oh! :;): Glad to have you aboard, Ben. I felt the same way about Mr. O'Keefe. I used to think that he would get things changed over at NASA but now I'm beginning to change my views about him. Have you written any letters to NASA or your state congress/senate elected officials? I know it my sound like a waste of time but it won't hurt. I also think that unfortunately, it will be 20-30 yrs before we get humans to Mars unless a couple of Bill Gates-type person decides otherwise. I agree with Free Spirit about the robotic missions. NASA does excel there.

Adrian · 2003-09-19 07:35:42

I've long thought that the reason NASA does well at robotic missions is because they're far less politicized than human missions, and also inevitably because they are much smaller scale. While missions like Galileo and the Global Surveyor are obviously still worth hundreds of millions at least, they pale into comparison with the manpower and money - and bureaucracy and politics - involved in the Shuttle and the ISS.

Bill White · 2003-09-19 07:35:55

NASA is merely the symptom and is not the disease.

The underlying cause is * our * collective failure to articulate a pro-space vision that will motivate the pharoahs of Wall Street and K Street. Sean Keefe performs EXACTLY as this Administration wants him to perform.

Shallow PR about "exploring space" and nothing of substance.

The essay "Lost Mars" at the top of today's NewMars page hits the nail on the head. We have simply failed to articulate WHY entering space is a good idea worth the expediture of many billions of dollars.

WHY space? WHY now? Sean Keefe's performance merely reflects the fact that neither Congress nor the President have been persuaded by the answers offered thus far.

Palomar · 2003-09-19 07:48:12

NASA is merely the symptom and is not the disease.
The underlying cause is * our * collective failure to articulate a pro-space vision that will motivate the pharoahs of Wall Street and K Street. Sean Keefe performs EXACTLY as this Administration wants him to perform.
Shallow PR about "exploring space" and nothing of substance.
The essay "Lost Mars" at the top of today's NewMars page hits the nail on the head. We have simply failed to articulate WHY entering space is a good idea worth the expediture of many billions of dollars.
WHY space? WHY now? Sean Keefe's performance merely reflects the fact that neither Congress nor the President have been persuaded by the answers offered thus far.

*Right you are, Bill. Succinctly stated.

Can we say "Letter Writing Campaign"?

--Cindy

::EDIT:: Just found this very good article on Yahoo! "Why Space? The Top Ten Reasons"

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....reasons

Ben Barrett · 2003-09-19 13:08:39

I think you might be on to something there, Bill. Hey if congress is taking notice maybe now is the time to press the issue. The other thing that I see is that we have all the other special interest groups to compete with, some of them much better funded than we are. This being said I think that maybe if enough people pester NASA about a manned mars mission, then who knows they might finally give in. BTW great article in Discover magazine called 'The Real Reason NASA Won't Go to Mars'. If you get the magazine check it out. Also I have no relation to Shaun ... that I know of.

Ben Barrett

Tyr · 2003-09-28 18:45:15

I get mad at NASA a lot, but is NASA really to blame? NASA only does what Congress tells it to do. The aerospace companies pitch things to Congress, but Congress decides, not Boeing or Lock-Mart. Senators and Reps are not engineers or scientists usually. Congress changes every so many years and politics rather than good engineering rules. Why do they ship the SRBs all the way back to Utah for refurbishing? Why don't they build a refurbishment facility near KSC? I'll probably be criticized for making accusations with no evidence, but it's probably done to keep jobs in Utah because of some politician. Sometimes I think the best thing to do is to dissolve NASA entirely and let business figure out what to do, how to do it, and make it cost effective.

Preston · 2003-10-25 10:05:14

ROUND 2:

The Mars Society web page tells us that John McCain read Zubrin's op-ed and has called him to testify. O'Keefe and some others will also be testifying Oct. 29. So maybe O'Keefe will have defend himself.

Preston · 2003-10-25 10:41:30

It looks like the head of the Space Frontier Foundation will be at that hearing too! Definitely an ally. I don't know if they will just be answering question or will be given time to make a presentation, but you can check out some of the testimonies Tumlinson has given to congress in the past on the site.

http://www.space-frontier.org/

dickbill · 2003-12-18 20:49:54

you should watch c-span2 guys, it's about the US space program

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2003-09-18 16:04:56

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#2 2003-09-19 00:25:27

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#3 2003-09-19 02:27:13

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#4 2003-09-19 06:57:25

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#5 2003-09-19 07:35:42

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#6 2003-09-19 07:35:55

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#7 2003-09-19 07:48:12

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#8 2003-09-19 13:08:39

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#9 2003-09-28 18:45:15

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#10 2003-10-25 10:05:14

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#11 2003-10-25 10:41:30

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

#12 2003-12-18 20:49:54

Re: Dismay With Nasa - Nasa Regresses once again

Board footer