Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

clark · 2004-01-14 10:18:22

In only a few hours, President Bush will make his announcements on his new Space Policy for NASA. The rumors have been flying, and most here are waiting in anticipation (but not all! ).

So, here is a link to CNN, which has an article about what we might get...

[http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/01/1 … index.html]Bush to seek billions for moon, Mars treks

From Miles O'Brien
CNN
Wednesday, January 14, 2004 Posted: 11:14 AM EST (1614 GMT

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Wednesday will call on Congress to increase funding for NASA by nearly a billion dollars annually over the next five years, while radically transforming the space agency's manned space flight goals -- from low Earth orbit -- to audacious missions to the moon and ultimately, Mars.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 10:36:11

Prelim info makes me think it sucks for Mars enthusiast but overall it's a good plan for NASA, and is almost necessary if we want to beat China into space.

clark · 2004-01-14 10:39:52

Do you think it would 'suck' as much if he set a timeline for Mars in 20 years?

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 10:42:58

Not as much as "after 2030."

clark · 2004-01-14 12:16:14

True... but either way, we're going to Mars in a couple of hours.

[http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040114/D802MD0G0.html]http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040114/D802MD0G0.html

Bush Seeks $1B for Moon, Mars Missions

Bill White · 2004-01-14 12:25:38

Prelim info makes me think it sucks for Mars enthusiast but overall it's a good plan for NASA, and is almost necessary if we want to beat China into space.

Can you say "unfunded mandate?" One report says $1 billion per year extra for 5 years and then that is it, no more extra funding.

clark · 2004-01-14 12:27:37

One report says $1 billion per year extra for 5 years and then that is it, no more extra funding.

Ummm, Bush only has, at most, 5 more years. He can't guareentee funding beyond that. Come on Bill, you know better.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 13:32:36

Um, he can't guarantee funding for 4 more years, either. Nothing is a guarantee in the US political sphere. That's perhaps the good thing about our government, it's hard for anyone to really set stuff in stone.

No firm timeline has been or will be set for Mars.

This is a good thing for taxpayers, and a good thing for NASA as a whole. But I do not expect this to really push the Mars Soceity forward. I'll probably be 60 by the time we get to Mars. Zubrin and others will probably be dead or at most in a nursing home.

Bleh. I never really felt NASA was going to do anything significant anyway.

Edited By Josh Cryer on 1074108774

clark · 2004-01-14 13:36:08

No firm timeline has been or will be set for Mars.

How are your predictions working out Josh?

I'm 2 for 3... soon to be 3 for 3. Not to mention a big fat I told you so. :laugh:

This is a good thing for taxpayers, and a good thing for NASA as a whole. But I do not expect this to really push the Mars Soceity forward.

Hmm, good for America, good for NASA, but not good for colonization efforts of Mars as soon as possible... Careful, you're making Bush sound almost reasonable.

clark · 2004-01-14 13:49:33

Go here to watch the announcement live:

[http://www.nasa.gov/home/index.html]NASA website

You need real player to view. Click on the center piece with the pic of Bush on it.

I started it up, and it starts with a CGI picture of several astronauts on Mars, saluting to the camera (your POV). Pretty nifty.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 13:52:39

How are your predictions working out Josh?

I'm not saying that, Space.com says that.

They've seen the documents, so I trust them.

Hmm, good for America, good for NASA, but not good for colonization efforts of Mars as soon as possible... Careful, you're making Bush sound almost reasonable.

Yes, it's reasonable to work in baby steps. But the arguments for going to Mars are equally as reasonable. You know the arguments, in fact. Almost paradoxically, it could be found that in our exploration of the moon, Mars is an easier target. Water on Mars, fairly protective atmosphere on Mars, lots of readily available resources on Mars, etc.

clark · 2004-01-14 13:54:30

Yeah, MArs is easier to live on, but it's a bit harder to get to.

The moon will make it easier to get to Mars, it won't make it harder. :;):

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 13:57:58

If I need crutches it will.

And if that Space Conglomerate I've rambled about before is built because of the moon, then we can kiss having a free Mars goodbye.

Mars is harder to get to, but since it's easier to live on, I think that outweighs the counter-argument by leaps and bounds.

clark · 2004-01-14 14:00:17

We have a better chance of experiencing space, as in more people, if we go to the moon. Isn't that worth something?

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 14:05:20

I think we have a better chance of exploring space if we work on it on our own and stop depending on governments to do it for us, really.

clark · 2004-01-14 14:06:56

Getting rid of the Shuttle might help that along (gets government out of the launch business). And just look at the coming sub-orbital rides in the near future.

It may not be long before we can contemplate orbital trips by a greater percentage of the public...

Stu · 2004-01-14 14:16:07

(Listening) Oh get ON with it!!!!

S

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 14:17:02

Shouldn't it have started by now?

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 14:44:51

:laugh:

Told you.

He mentioned Mars four times, only three times by name, and not once exculsively (ie "Mars and beyond").

jadeheart · 2004-01-14 14:45:52

Thought I was done w/ NM for today but I found [http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymo … 1_562.html]this just now.

This is, of course, what you'd expect in terms of liberal skepticism when it comes to space spending, but I thought it was reasonable (except that damned half-trillion price tag the media keeps parroting from Bush Sr.'s failed SEI-- I am going to have to give them some feedback on that).

I wanted to add this just as food for thought, not to be a wet blanket. As a space enthusiast I find stuff like this a little discouraging but the issues raised by all sides need to be addressed. And I think it serves to keep people from getting carried away. IMO it doesn't hurt to evaluate Bush's motives from all possible angles, and the looming election can't be ignored as a motivation.

Here's a tidbit for the anti-moon folks among us:

"What would astronauts at a Moon base do? I haven't the foggiest notion. Note that NASA has not so much as sent a robot probe to the Moon in 30 years, because as far as space-exploration advocates can tell, there is nothing, absolutely nothing, of value to do on the Moon. Geologists are interested in the Moon's formation. If there is ever a fusion reactor to meet the world's energy needs, the "helium three" on the Moon might prove useful, but fusion reactors are decades away from practicality, assuming they ever work. Spending $200 billion on a Moon base that does nothing would be pure, undiluted government waste."

Here's the crux of the article:

Mr Bush no doubt hopes that launching an exciting, visionary project that invokes Americas pioneer spirit will boost his campaign to be re-elected in November's presidential poll. Since Mr Bush's grand vision may not be shared by the current Congress or future ones or indeed future presidents his grand announcement this week may not, in the end, amount to anything more than starry-eyed campaign rhetoric. Of course, only an incorrigible sceptic could possibly conclude that Mr Bush knows this perfectly well and intends simply to let the whole thing fade away after it has helped him get re-elected

Stu · 2004-01-14 14:46:04

Unless I missed it in the crackling, he didn't actually give a date for a manned Mars mission... but human flights to the Moon beginning 2020? You can put Mars another ten years ahead of that.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 14:50:28

If you're lucky. It takes longer than 10 years to build a facility (which we'd need to go to Mars if we're going to use the moon as a stepping stone), unless you throw many billions of dollars into it. This is a gradual step, without increasing NASA's budget by too much. Basically take a few hundred extra million and do a little bit at a time with it.

Bill White · 2004-01-14 14:52:54

:laugh:
Told you.
He mentioned Mars four times, only three times by name, and not once exculsively (ie "Mars and beyond").

[http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases … 114-1.html]White House official release.

Unless we get solid details on this CEV thing (another view-graph wonder-craft?) my preliminary assessment:

I see sizzle, but where's the steak?

I see hat, but where's the cattle?

I hear the oohhs and aahhs, but where's the Emperor's clothing?

= = =

One very good point has been made. Its now politically acceptable to discuss "standing down" the shuttle orbiter. Big kudos to President Bush for that.

IMHO there is no need for the orbiter to fly again. Ever. Now, take that money and build shuttle B to finish the ISS and then do the nuclear stuff (JIMO, SAFE) and all the other things President Bush calls for. Sooner rather than later.

If the orbiter were permanently grounded TODAY, many billions would be freed up for all these other cool projects.

clark · 2004-01-14 14:52:57

D'oh.

From his speech:

The extended human presence on the Moon will enable astronauts to develop new technologies and harness the Moon's abundant resources to allow manned exploration of more challenging environments. An extended human presence on the Moon could reduce the costs of further exploration, since lunar-based spacecraft could escape the Moon's lower gravity using less energy at less cost than Earth-based vehicles. The experience and knowledge gained on the Moon will serve as a foundation for human missions beyond the Moon, beginning with Mars.

Josh Cryer · 2004-01-14 14:58:23

The best thing coming out of this is that it boosts manned exploration, imho. That's one thing NASA really sorely lacks. But the reason, is that manned exploration is expensive, and I believe that the Bush "Commission on the Implementation of U.S. Space Exploration Policy" will soon find this out in the most painful way possible.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-01-14 10:18:22

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#2 2004-01-14 10:36:11

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#3 2004-01-14 10:39:52

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#4 2004-01-14 10:42:58

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#5 2004-01-14 12:16:14

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#6 2004-01-14 12:25:38

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#7 2004-01-14 12:27:37

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#8 2004-01-14 13:32:36

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#9 2004-01-14 13:36:08

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#10 2004-01-14 13:49:33

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#11 2004-01-14 13:52:39

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#12 2004-01-14 13:54:30

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#13 2004-01-14 13:57:58

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#14 2004-01-14 14:00:17

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#15 2004-01-14 14:05:20

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#16 2004-01-14 14:06:56

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#17 2004-01-14 14:16:07

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#18 2004-01-14 14:17:02

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#19 2004-01-14 14:44:51

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#20 2004-01-14 14:45:52

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#21 2004-01-14 14:46:04

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#22 2004-01-14 14:50:28

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#23 2004-01-14 14:52:54

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#24 2004-01-14 14:52:57

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

#25 2004-01-14 14:58:23

Re: Bush's New Space Policy - Discussion, reactions, questions...

Board footer