Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Shaun Barrett · 2004-10-20 04:01:42

Hi Comstar03.
Yes, Australia did have an early stab at space exploration back in the Woomera days. But it's been "a long time between drinks" - to quote a phrase!
When I was a kid, I wasn't playing with wind-up toys of Aussie space capsules carrying Aussie astronauts. It was the Soviet Union or it was America doing the good stuff ... [period].

I've seen what years of apathy and neglect did to the nascent Australian space program and I certainly don't want it, or anything like it, to happen to the United States.

That's why the article about John Kerry is so worrying to me, even though I'm not American. I see myself as a citizen of Earth and I see space as the only way forward for the human race. To that extent, I feel justified in at least asking where the U.S. space program would be going under John Kerry.
The article I linked to above seems to be saying Kerry is a closet Luddite who thinks the universe ends at the cruising altitude of Air Force One. That's a serious accusation and I wanted to know if there's any truth in it.
???

BWhite · 2004-10-20 05:10:47

Mark Whittington has a strong dislike for anything Kerry. Period.

Shaun, the Bush plan does nothing between 2004 and 2008 that cannot be undone in 2008. Indeed, with the further shuttle delays and the cost of Hubble rescue, the Bush plan will be delayed even further.

If space is seen as a "Bush plan" then that makes it even more likely the Democrats will kill it out of spite as soon as possible. Therefore we must de-politicize the need for space exploration.

The title of a book by Roger Lanuis says it all IMHO: "Spaceflight and the Myth of Presidential Leadership"

Shaun Barrett · 2004-10-20 05:55:25

Bill:-

Mark Whittington has a strong dislike for anything Kerry. Period.

O.K. Thanks Bill!
Just thought I'd ask.

[You realise, of course, that if John Kerry is elected President and abandons space, I will never forgive you. ??? ]

Palomar · 2004-10-20 06:02:05

*If the poll numbers are "true" and the margin continues to hold, Kerry won't be elected.

--Cindy

SpaceNut · 2004-10-20 12:55:27

But the war on terror, funding of the war in Iraq will remain no matter who is elected. Here are some numbers for troop and from which nation are currently in Iraq.

Which countries are providing military support
United States 138,000
Britain 8,530
Albania 70
Australia 850
Azerbaijan 150
Bulgaria 455
Czech Rep. 92
Denmark 510
Dominican Rep. 300
El Salvador 360
Estonia 55
Georgia 150
Hungary 300
Italy 2,700
Japan 1,000
Kazakhstan 25
Latvia 120
Lithuania 105
Macedonia 28
Moldova 25
Mongolia 180
Netherlands 1,263
New Zealand 60
Nicaragua 115
Norway 150
Poland 2,400
Portugal 120
Romania 730
Singapore 200
Slovakia 105
South Korea 675 (3,000 on way)
Thailand 460
Tonga 44
Ukraine 1,700

Alexander Sheppard · 2004-10-22 00:18:11

I tend to think that what the US space program needs desperately is someone to "shake things up", as Zubrin said at least paraphrased in his book. Zubrin talks about extremely wasteful corporate welfare which has been going on for a long time, the ISS is basically designed to enrich aerospace profits at the expense of doing useful science, etc. All this is basically obvious from what Zubrin says, though he isn't a leftist and he doesn't actually use the term corporate welfare. What the space program needs is someone to reprioritize useful science and force the state-corporate NASA bureaucracy to align itself in a way suited to that task. The current system and goals are quite disgusting, and I think a lot of people more or less realize that. I remember a prominent astronomer saying it was "very corrupt". Indeed it is.

Now I for one do not think it is likely that Kerry will do this. My impression is that the space program will not be a priority. Whether it will be more of a non-priority than it is now is questionable. What I suspect will happen is that less of a priority will be payed to incredibly wasteful projects like ISS, Shuttle etc. With regards to more useful projects like the rovers and other robotic missions, I suspect priority for that will remain at least constant, and perhaps increase. Whether there is a net loss here of anything really useful is at least questionable IMO. Frankly, if less priority was payed to useless pork welfare projects, we might well stand to gain, because it might open up more funds to maneuver into useful stuff.

I have to admit that I've grown increasingly less of a gung-ho humans-to-Mars-quick advocate and have become to some extent more interested in the pure space sciences. One reason for this might be that I think humans will probably merge with their own technology some time in the next century (assuming some disaster does not occur) and so all Zubrin's talk about a Martian civilization will not be relevant. Instead things will take a quite different turn.

SpaceNut · 2004-10-25 07:59:11

The US election and the future of the solar system

happy reading all, I myself have not read it as of yet but will edit comments later.

SpaceNut · 2004-10-26 20:21:29

Well we finally have the official Kerry web site link.

http://www.johnkerry.com/communi....cy.html

Of course the first paragraph trumpets Nasa research but closes it with to focus NASA on those areas of aeronautics and space research where the greatest public benefit can be realized.

So what is he saying to manned flight IMO manned flight is over.

Commodore · 2004-10-26 21:00:47

Without an end goal, all this "research" Kerry wants to fund will be seen as dead weight and will be an even easier target in the halls of Congress than Bush's more expensive exploration efforts.

Rxke · 2004-10-27 03:15:44

What I make out of this is he is *not* against manned Luna or Mars missions, but not at the cost of other projects.

"They will support solar system exploration as an important goal for our human and robotic programs, but only as one goal among several."

His solution: do it internationally, to spread the costs

But if that is cost effective? ISS proved a nightmare, maybe NASA et all have leearned their lesson and a next international coop will have better agreements...

SpaceNut · 2004-10-27 06:23:07

I want to know how Kerrry thinks he can make a more balanced Nasa?
Such as in even dollars for every mission, as in the same amount as the mars probes versus the expense of a manned flight with a shuttle or anyother vehicle. What could he possibly mean?

Kerry Promises 'A More Balanced' NASA

C M Edwards · 2004-10-27 08:22:03

This seems like a statement that Kerry is basically going to keep NASA hobbled, expending its resources on programs that will never leave Earth orbit rather than actually directing it to go somewhere. It's just more of the same, pre-Bush, material. (Ho-hum.)

However, reduced involvement in the space shuttle and space station would free up substantial portions of the NASA budget. Even small reductions in those programs could allow NASA to get to its feet again even if Kerry wants the leg irons left on.

Alexander Sheppard · 2004-10-28 20:21:03

Well, I don't know if we really lose anything by de-emphasizing SSTS and ISS. They're financial black holes, and they take away from projects that are actually useful. Frankly I would rather have SSTS and ISS dead and the money put into more useful projects, even if they are purely robotic, although of course I'd prefer there was a manned portion. At present we are more or less throwing our money down a toilet.

I think a lunar base is a good idea, not as a front end for human colonization, which surely makes no sense there on a large scale, but for scientific projects like large, networked telescopes (perhaps grav wave detectors also make sense?)

I find it a sign of how power operates in Washington that the potentially quite useful superconducting supercollider was cancelled in the early 90s while stuff like the SSTS and ISS have been allowed to keep going. The main difference is apparently that unlike particle accelerators, the latter projects provide stable and continuing subsidy for large corporations. The same goes for what is fiscally a much larger array of Pentagon projects.

I do agree, and I don't think this will happen under Kerry, is that what is needed for someone to basically force the large corporations into a more streamlined system of production that is oriented toward a goal, like colonizing Mars, for instance. That is basically what Zubrin advocates and it seems to have worked reasonably well in other state capitalist enviornments (take WWII for a great example).

We should realize of course that the Bush plan is probably just a lot of hot air, exactly the same as what Zubrin calls the "90 day report". The great likelihood seems to be that the large majority of this will never actually be implemented.

To close, I do think the public reaction to Bush's space initiative is pretty understandable. In the first place, NASA has been very wasteful many times in the past, and I think that is felt. Bush's initiative is also very likely a lot of hot air, judging from the past. Thirdly the public is being robbed and stolen from, and in this (state created) atmosphere of crisis, "war on terror", etc. people are apt to be more critical of long term projects with little tangible short term benefit (or, to most people, long term benefit either). In more decent times I would guess that people would be more tolerant.

Rxke · 2004-10-29 01:18:44

http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/s … N.htm]John Glenn's view on Kerry's vision for space

Note that the first American in space used to be a Democratic senator too, of course...

Grypd · 2004-10-29 09:55:25

So the shuttle will remain soaking NASA funds like a giant sponge. If the Shuttle is to remain flying then funds must be found to keep it going and yes this means cutbacks to the CEV etc. And with the cost of the ISS rising it seems it will be a long time before any return to the Moon or a mission to Mars will come.

Of course Europe and China may well get there first and stay, it will be a bit embarassing that. Only the retirement of the Shuttle and a decent replacement will ever give space advancement a chance.

BWhite · 2004-10-29 09:57:56

So the shuttle will remain soaking NASA funds like a giant sponge. If the Shuttle is to remain flying then funds must be found to keep it going and yes this means cutbacks to the CEV etc. And with the cost of the ISS rising it seems it will be a long time before any return to the Moon or a mission to Mars will come.
Of course Europe and China may well get there first and stay, it will be a bit embarassing that. Only the retirement of the Shuttle and a decent replacement will ever give space advancement a chance.

Finish ISS (if we must) with shuttle C or other new booster.

Kill two birds with one stone.

SpaceNut · 2004-10-29 10:25:05

But the problem remains, no funds nobody does any work beyound where they are. Even if the funds were available today it still would be 4 years at least before it would be flying.

SpaceNut · 2004-10-30 05:45:28

Lots of Kerry stories on http://www.spacepolitics.com/
Florida Today on Bush vs. Kerry and of the Glenn on Kerry space policy simular articles can also be found on the http://www.projectconstellation.us/news/ Being Good Stewards of the Nation's Space Program
BUSH ADMINISTRATION GRADE: C- Prepared for Rep. Bart Gordon, the article is not from the House Science Committee but is appaerently authored by a staffer from the Democratic Caucus Committee on Science.

On the other side of the coin NASA Scientist: Bush Stifles Global Warming Evidence on http://www.space.com/news/bush_warming_041027.html

While on NasaWatch an article titled The Day John Kerry Tried to Gut NASA - All By Himself wanted to Terminate the National Aerospace Plane Program, Terminate NASA's support for producers of commercial airlines, and Terminate the International Space Station Program back in 1995.

http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/000324.html#more

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2004-11-01 10:08:23

He was talking about outer space again, I saw it yesterday even on the net. Kerry referred to Florida's space industry and said he's going to create more work... jobs I want to create are the ones that come out of science and technology. Kerry’s approach would be to preserve NASA’s traditional “balanced” approach to a diverse research agenda that would include restoring its now-threatened aeronautics budget. The paper also labels the Bush plan an un-funded “political stunt.” One person wrote after ' alarm at another Bush term stems from such issues as the move from a multi-trillion-dollar surplus to a multi-trillion-dollar deficit, two costly tax breaks that overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy, and the simultaneous budget-breaking foray into Iraq that has stretched our military thin and diverted us from other dangers.' John Kerry has overseen NASA for years as a member of the Science, Technology, and Space Subcommittee, part of the Senate Committee for Commerce, Science and Transportation. As such, he is more aware of the agency and its issues than most. (Bush, on the other hand, is reported never to have visited the NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston during his time as governor of Texas.) Kerry has also advocated a project on the scale of Apollo to end the country’s energy dependency, which further demonstrates an appreciation and commitment to technology that he is likely to bring to office.

there is some more news coming out Florida E-Voting in Doubt
, Diebold Integrity Questioned. Looks like another re-count and court battle. Leaked memos revealing more security flaws . California authorities have said they plan to sue Diebold Electronic Systems, Diebold knowingly sold the state shoddy electronic voting machines that put its elections at risk ?

SpaceNut · 2004-11-01 10:24:26

With this new found space we now have the chance for a race but will it be tripped up by who wins is the question. Or will the alternavtive space ventures by private industry lead the way.

Space Race

SpaceNut · 2004-11-04 11:33:30

Though someone must always lose in a race it may not always be the winner that wins. AS indicated by the florida today title Victory will jump-start space plans I beg to question will it.

It is felt that since Nasa has four years to get started down the road to space exploration that it would be hard to undue.
This is what they hope to accomplish in that time frame.

And during Bush's second term, analysts said NASA would have time to get the initiative off to a solid start by:
Launching an initial robotic mission to map the moon, measure the radiation environment and attempt to find stores of water ice at the lunar poles.
Developing prototypes for a crew exploration vehicle and then staging a "fly-off" between the top two contenders.
Selecting launch vehicles to ferry astronauts and cargo on moon missions.
Designing lunar landers and other systems for the initiative.

Well we will just have to see if the congress continues to fight the president all the way to the bank or if there will be concession along the way during the next four years.

Commodore · 2004-11-04 20:14:27

Though someone must always lose in a race it may not always be the winner that wins. AS indicated by the florida today title http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/s … tm]Victory will jump-start space plans I beg to question will it.
It is felt that since Nasa has four years to get started down the road to space exploration that it would be hard to undue.
This is what they hope to accomplish in that time frame.
And during Bush's second term, analysts said NASA would have time to get the initiative off to a solid start by:
Launching an initial robotic mission to map the moon, measure the radiation environment and attempt to find stores of water ice at the lunar poles.
Developing prototypes for a crew exploration vehicle and then staging a "fly-off" between the top two contenders.
Selecting launch vehicles to ferry astronauts and cargo on moon missions.
Designing lunar landers and other systems for the initiative.
Well we will just have to see if the congress continues to fight the president all the way to the bank or if there will be concession along the way during the next four years.

Given the existing public support for space, I don't think Bush will have a problem if he sells it directly to the American people.

This will be even easier once the engineers cook up some designs, and some pretty pictures see the light of day.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2004-10-20 04:01:42

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#52 2004-10-20 05:10:47

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#53 2004-10-20 05:55:25

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#54 2004-10-20 06:02:05

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#55 2004-10-20 12:55:27

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#56 2004-10-22 00:18:11

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#57 2004-10-25 07:59:11

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#58 2004-10-26 20:21:29

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#59 2004-10-26 21:00:47

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#60 2004-10-27 03:15:44

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#61 2004-10-27 06:23:07

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#62 2004-10-27 08:22:03

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#63 2004-10-28 20:21:03

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#64 2004-10-29 01:18:44

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#65 2004-10-29 09:55:25

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#66 2004-10-29 09:57:56

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#67 2004-10-29 10:25:05

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#68 2004-10-30 05:45:28

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#69 2004-11-01 10:08:23

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#70 2004-11-01 10:24:26

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#71 2004-11-04 11:33:30

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

#72 2004-11-04 20:14:27

Re: Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Board footer

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)

Re: Kerry's position on space 2 - ...continue discussion here (for now)