You are not logged in.
http://www.space.com/news//050421_aeron … html]Frank wolf a space.com article
For NASA to implement the Space Exploration Initiative and return to the Moon by 2020 it needs money. Since NASA will now not be getting this directly from the goverment it has to make this from savings. The problem is that the savings NASA makes are by cutting back on programs and this has brought a lot of opposition.
NASA already plans to cut by about 2680 jobs a 15.3% of the NASA payroll by 2006. This would save the agency about $268 million. Needless to say there is rightful opposition but these posts are mostly to come from the centers where Aeronautics research is done and in non core areas where NASA can buy in the work done.
If NASA is to have the funds to start on the CEV and have it ready for work after the Shuttle is retired then work on it must start soon. To do this though requires a lot more money and NASA plans to finish other programs like voyager and Hubble and other Earth directed research missions. This though has also engendered opposition from space enthusiasts and the congress and senate floors.
If NASA cannot cut the aeronautics program and the planned research projects and the older missions. Then where is it to find the Money it needs....I see tough times ahead with a program that is likely to be delayed. And the CEV will not be ready.
Chan eil mi aig a bheil ùidh ann an gleidheadh an status quo; Tha mi airson cur às e.
Offline
I would say that there is the possibility that the shuttle program because it is spread out at multiple sites makes for the chance that there is duplication of not only process but maybe of much needed resources. This also extends to the shuttle army.
As for the research for the CEV normally the company wishing to sell a product buts forth the dollars to develope the item and then would recoupe those thou sales. But Nasa red tape and contracts make this more expensive due impart to low volume of production and bloating of price per item it does purchase.
The one thing the Russians having going for it is that it can keep turning out the same item with only slight changes to it. But once they shift to klipper that all goes out the window and even there costs to get to space will begin to rise.
On the note of cutting programs or cancelling them you must also weigh the cost of replacement into the justification and chances must be also given to raise funds for these programs in other unique ways. Even selling them might be an option. There may also present other opertunities for startup businesses to do data capture as in the possible voyager termination. Nasa needs to get creative but this can not be at the reduction of what it has schedueled to come to it in future budget years just because they may be able to get a few dollars into its programs from another avenue.
Offline
As I said before some of the real dangers come form external economic for the USA, and world political problems having an effect on US industry. In 1970, NASA administrators said they were to be on Mars within 10 years. The new CEV craft is not yet done, in about 7 years the CEV will be absorbing maximum funding while X-prize is showing that reuseable spacecraft can and will be built. It is also going to create a broader market for space tourism. Dr. Zubrin maintains we can skip the Moon and get to Mars in ten years for $50 billion. NASA will spend over $229,000,000,000 ($229 thousand million, or nearly a quarter of a Trillion dollars) developing the capability to send astronauts to the moon
NASA has plans to build a shuttle2, will be new CEV be a better shuttle-IISome say NASA will try and build a CEV shuttle type craft to fly around the Moon and back in the future but danger in the CEV program right now is to expect too much from it ??
'first steps are not for cheap, think about it...
did China build a great Wall in a day ?' ( Y L R newmars forum member )
Offline
It really hasn't started yet.
The key will be ramping down the shuttle program the Shuttle to the point were it can not be resumed at the at the end of the decade.
Other than that, the 2008 presidential election will be critical.
Anyone know McCains position on space?
"Yes, I was going to give this astronaut selection my best shot, I was determined when the NASA proctologist looked up my ass, he would see pipes so dazzling he would ask the nurse to get his sunglasses."
---Shuttle Astronaut Mike Mullane
Offline
McCain wont run in 2008. He already look like "Tales from the Crypt"" now, and lord only knows for 2008-2016....
Offline
That and him stabbing the GOP in the back over judges, stabbing the Libertarians (and much of the GOP and others) in the back over campaign finance, and stabbing everybody in the back for pushing a US-branded Kyoto protocol with Joe Leiberman.
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
I wouldn't be so sure. He does great in polls already.
If Clinton runs I don't think the GOP will risk it with anyone else.
I'd be surprised if there isn't some version of a McCain/Guillani ticket in 08.
"Yes, I was going to give this astronaut selection my best shot, I was determined when the NASA proctologist looked up my ass, he would see pipes so dazzling he would ask the nurse to get his sunglasses."
---Shuttle Astronaut Mike Mullane
Offline
Yang Liwei Rocket
Want to joyride to Mars and not for a long term approach to humanity in space, get a grip and think that we want to go and stay and rotate crews , not go and leave!!!!!!!
We need to work on an enterprise model for space to start recouping expenditure and increase the uses in space. We are using a scientist model that doesn't care about recouping funds expended but governments and corporates want returns and for corporates they can write-off losses against other profits for private corporations.
Offline
Regarding McCain: He's no back-stabber, he runs 'em right through from the front while looking 'em in the eye! And what's looks got to do with it, youngster? Reagan would've looked pretty crypty without all that makeup. If you'd gone through what McCain did and came out of it with his kind of sanity ... it's experience and what's goes on inside his head that counts, unlike Dubya, see? My kinda' guy.
Offline
As noted the choices for who will be running in 2009 office start is sort of only speculation. Senators John McCain and Hillary Clinton are two potential Presidential candidates in 2008
2009: a space vision; Variables facing the Vision for Space Exploration over the next four years
Do we really want to take the first obvious step and look at the people who are currently being promoted as possible presidential candidates for the 2008 election.
If enough can get done before the new elections should start towards the build of the CEV, then it is up to congress to not allow Nasa's budgets to get cut at that time. Especially if it has had its maiden voyage by then and is ready for manned flight.
Offline
another thread on it
www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=536&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
'first steps are not for cheap, think about it...
did China build a great Wall in a day ?' ( Y L R newmars forum member )
Offline
Previous Comments show the fluid responses from the government officials about the development of space for a permanent presence of humans. It shows that programs could be seriously effected when a President Changes over from the previous one that can set a vision butnot followed.
I think we need to provide the a human cornerstone is exploration of space and enshrine it into law with a GDP Percentage for Budget perpetual and growth within the Budget. If not they could decide to reduce the budget effecting current development work or existing missions.
Offline
[url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18082415/]Cash-strapped NASA looks to private industry
Agency will look to businesses to meet goals set by President Bush[/url]
Offline
NASA's budget is in real trouble. Not from a great reduction in funds but in how those funds are to be spent.
Lawmakers Rebuff NASA's Plan to Kill Robotic Lunar Lander
Colorado Springs, Colo.—House and Senate appropriators have pushed back against NASA’s proposed termination of a planned 2011 robotic lunar lander mission, directing the agency to spend $20 million this year to continue work on a follow-on to the 2008 Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter
Not in itself an extreme problem but when combined with other spending commitments NASA will now also have to keep on with.
Specifically, the lawmakers want NASA to restore half of a $54 million cut it made to education programs, and to provide $5 million for a Solar Probe mission under study at the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, Md.
The lawmakers also expressed concern about the long-planned Space Interferometry Mission being reduced to a technology-development effort, but did not call for any restoration of funds. The letter also urged NASA to provide stable funding for its Independent Verification and Validation Facility in Fairmont, W.Va.
The lawmakers are silent on the rest of NASA’s operating plan, which also quantifies the extra funding NASA must spend this year to maintain the launch schedules of major programs including the James Webb Space Telescope and the Mars Science Laboratory.
Keeping James Webb on track to launch in 2013 will cost $478.5 million this year, $9.9 million more than NASA previously anticipated, according to the documents.
Maintaining the Mars Science Laboratory’s 2009 launch date will cost an extra $62.7 million this year, pushing the mission’s total price tag, including launch and several years of operations, to $1.75 billion.
This all has to come out of the VSE budget as will any cost overuns with the Shuttle launches. The more these cost accrue the less chance NASA will have on getting there launch platforms ready and the CEV process to keep on track.
Chan eil mi aig a bheil ùidh ann an gleidheadh an status quo; Tha mi airson cur às e.
Offline
I see Jeff Bell posted another anti-NASA rant over at spacedaily
Offline