What Will be the Future of NASA?

On Jan 28, 9:48*am, David Spain wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:

Stuff I'm pretty much in complete agreement with.
For the short term I think NASA should completely embrace the role of space
educator. There is no reason not to cover the moon in tele-robotic explorers
controlled from earth by middle schoolers, with NASA/JPL supplying the
infrastructure.

And if from that detailed exploration we find something so valuable as to
drive the commercial development of manned spaceflight, so much the better, at
least the possibility will be in our kid's imaginations.

What I worry about is how NASA maintains the infrastructure to support manned
spaceflight in the meantime. Lease or sell to the private sector?

Dave

The nasa infrastructure is mostly aged. like 39A & 39B the VAB and the
KSC support buildings. let private industry lease what they can use.

although I still thin thhe 2 pads should be converted to museums for
apoll and shuttle.

stack a model saturn 5 apollo on one pad, and enterprise on the other
both in launch configuration, and protect them with glass buildings.
If a skyscraper can be glass so can these.

Then open the pads for public viewing, some former pad rats can be
tour guides

On Jan 25, 6:28*am, " wrote:
Hello,
What direction will NASA take with the retirement of the overly
expensive shuttle program? Will America ever have a meaningful
exploration program again? Will it be canceled because of the huge
national debt? These are challenges we will need to contemplate.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *http://developco.webs.com

No money, no NASA or DARPA. What's to figure out or ponder?
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jan 25, 6:57*am, " wrote:
On Jan 25, 9:35*am, Jeff Findley wrote:



In article db1a6290-6933-4e17-9f62-cfb04aed7fb9
@l15g2000prg.googlegroups.com, says...

Hello,
What direction will NASA take with the retirement of the overly
expensive shuttle program? Will America ever have a meaningful
exploration program again? Will it be canceled because of the huge
national debt? These are challenges we will need to contemplate.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *http://developco.webs.com

The short answer is NASA doesn't really know for sure. *They're still
trying to figure out what pieces of the Orion and Ares programs they can
salvage. *Anything beyond that is really up in the air.

Try reading some of the space news websites and you should be able to
figure all of this out in short order.

Jeff
--
"Had Constellation actually been focused on building an Earth-Moon
transportation system, it might have survived. *The decision to have it
first build a costly and superfluous Earth-to-orbit transportation
system (Ares I) was a fatal mistake.", Henry Spencer 1/2/2011

If they dont reinvent themselves they have no future in manned space.

and because of congress ordering their choices to benefit the
selected, like thikol. nasa has become a joke.

today they announced they are looking to lease shuttle facilities

Exactly, but that means they'll have to start sharing the whole truth
and nothing but the truth, and you know that's never going to happen.
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jan 25, 9:02*am, LSMFT wrote:
wrote:
Hello,
What direction will NASA take with the retirement of the overly
expensive shuttle program? Will America ever have a meaningful
exploration program again? Will it be canceled because of the huge
national debt? These are challenges we will need to contemplate.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *http://developco..webs.com

America is headed to be a third world, third rate country. It's been
grossly mismanaged for far too long. I wish the fracking lawyers would
get out of government and let the scientists run things.

--
LSMFT

Those who would give up Essential Liberty
to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty *nor Safety.

Exactly, we got way too much government telling us lies and
obfuscating, as well as telling us whatever we can or can't do.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jan 25, 9:42*am, "Val Kraut" wrote:
wrote in message news:db1a6290-6933-4e17-9f62- What

direction will NASA take with the retirement of the overly

expensive shuttle program? Will America ever have a meaningful
exploration program again? Will it be canceled because of the huge
national debt? These are challenges we will need to contemplate.

Let's build a set of facts:

The Shuttle is just about over and can't be continued if we wanted to.

The ISS is chewing up a big piece of the budget - and we see articles that
after a little math say less than 6% of the manpower is doing any science -
the rest is ISS Operations. But we're committed to keep it going. So we're
learning operational procedures - but have nothing in the future to apply
them to. None of the miraculous drugs, perfect crystals, etc that would
result from the ISS ever materialized.

NASA has no real manned mission besides ISS defined - some foggy illusion of
flying by an asteroid in 2025 or maybe visiting a mathematical point in
space.

There is no long range goal with programs that leads to a final objective
like Mercury-Gemini-Apollo-Apollo Applications.

We read about a NASA speech that talks of and undefined flexible path that
doesn't include a manned moon mission. The speech ends with a list of
exciting things NASA is doing like prototyping manned rovers and habitats
for the lunar surface - but we're not going there - maybe we'll sell them to
the Chinese or Indians.

The White House says Constellation is dead - but it's still being funded -
Obama doesn't want it but after 2 years he still can't drive a stake through
it's heart. Although he's still trying.

NASA seems to revel in holding press conferences that present questionable
Pseudo-science or illogical logical reasoning about experiment results.

The rocket scientists in Congress are defining a new heavy lift booster -
that has no mission - but the congress seems to know what components it
should be built of, what it has to cost, and when it will be ready.

NASA is still spending significant funds on LEO operations - what will they
do in LEO? The air force is actually using systems in LEO and GEO.

At one point during Bush's second term, the Government was considering
closing up to 5 NASA centers as unneeded. Then the concept of 10 healthy
centers caught on.

Sightings of the new NASA administrator are rarer than clear photos of UFOs.

A large fraction of the NASA budget goes to pork at local institutions and
has nothing to do with space or aviation.

I'm sure others can add many more.

Does this seem like an unorganized mess?

SO - now we're in a big Federal budget crunch and everybody's looking for
something to cut.......Can we bet what happens next.

It's sad I can remember NASA achievements and commitment from the 1960s.

Lots of things are sad or pathetic about our nation as a whole. So,
which groups of insiders that got us into this mess do you want to
whack first?

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jan 25, 11:36*am, Doug Freyburger wrote:
wrote:

What direction will NASA take with the retirement of the overly
expensive shuttle program? Will America ever have a meaningful
exploration program again? Will it be canceled because of the huge
national debt? These are challenges we will need to contemplate.

Right now is the golden age of robotic deep space exporation. *Probes
from several coutries including the US are out there right now going to
new places and revisiting far away old places.

Having started my career at JPL I have an open bias favoring unmanned
probes. *If "A man's reach should exceed his grasp" then humanity's
reach (unmanned probes) should exceed our grasp (manned space). *It's
not a bad thing to lead the world in robotic space exploration funded by
the government, nor even a bad thing to be one country doing that among
several.

I'm okay with the current privatization moving toward manned space. *In
the long run it is bound to beat anything NASA can do. *Same principle
as Columbus's government funded trips versus the larger private
invasions. *Same principle as Lewis and Clark's government funded trip
versus the larger private colonizations.

Yes, unmanned probes beat anything involving humans by a good thousand
to one, and then some.

The obvious exceptions might be a planet like Venus, or even
developing and exploiting the interior of our moon, but then you'd
need to have a brain of a dysfunctional 5th grader to understand, and
like religion government has no brains whatsoever.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jan 25, 1:16*pm, " wrote:
On Jan 25, 2:36*pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:



wrote:

What direction will NASA take with the retirement of the overly
expensive shuttle program? Will America ever have a meaningful
exploration program again? Will it be canceled because of the huge
national debt? These are challenges we will need to contemplate.

Right now is the golden age of robotic deep space exporation. *Probes
from several coutries including the US are out there right now going to
new places and revisiting far away old places.

Having started my career at JPL I have an open bias favoring unmanned
probes. *If "A man's reach should exceed his grasp" then humanity's
reach (unmanned probes) should exceed our grasp (manned space). *It's
not a bad thing to lead the world in robotic space exploration funded by
the government, nor even a bad thing to be one country doing that among
several.

I'm okay with the current privatization moving toward manned space. *In
the long run it is bound to beat anything NASA can do. *Same principle
as Columbus's government funded trips versus the larger private
invasions. *Same principle as Lewis and Clark's government funded trip
versus the larger private colonizations.

I think our future is robotics.

Heard tonights state of the union will be a overall budget cut back to
2008 levels government wide. If thats true nasas budget just shrank
more...

if congresses goal is to keep the pork squealing restart the shuttle
supply lines, and go with a shuttle derived heavy lifter using same
mold lines.

the delay waiting for more tanks and boosters can be used to recertify
the shuttle, and make some needed upgrades...........

and keep the launch teams and everything together

The existing USAF could do everything that's NASA and DARPA combined,
except for roughly half the cost in in less than half the time,
because they already have full assess to all things secret and
nondisclosure rated, as well as they get to print their own loot.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jan 28, 9:21*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:

The existing USAF could do everything that's NASA and DARPA combined,
except for roughly half the cost in in less than half the time,
because they already have full assess to all things secret and
nondisclosure rated, as well as they get to print their own loot.

It's a very, very strange little world you live in...

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

Well military orbiting photo sats could do a far better job than nasa
ones.

But the military wouldnt be allowed to release the photos, if they did
everyone would know how good they are.

Which is sad because the resolution of mars or titans moon would be so
much better

On Jan 28, 6:20*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:

Yes, unmanned probes beat anything involving humans by a good thousand
to one, and then some.

Counterfactual dog-mookie.



The obvious exceptions might be a planet like Venus, or even
developing and exploiting the interior of our moon, but then you'd
need to have a brain of a dysfunctional 5th grader to understand,

Well, that explains why you get it and why us sane adults think you're
a loon.

Myself compared to your zero contributions is perhaps why you'd know
best.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jan 28, 7:39*am, " wrote:
On Jan 28, 9:48*am, David Spain wrote:



Doug Freyburger wrote:

Stuff I'm pretty much in complete agreement with.
For the short term I think NASA should completely embrace the role of space
educator. There is no reason not to cover the moon in tele-robotic explorers
controlled from earth by middle schoolers, with NASA/JPL supplying the
infrastructure.

And if from that detailed exploration we find something so valuable as to
drive the commercial development of manned spaceflight, so much the better, at
least the possibility will be in our kid's imaginations.

What I worry about is how NASA maintains the infrastructure to support manned
spaceflight in the meantime. Lease or sell to the private sector?

Dave

The nasa infrastructure is mostly aged. like 39A & 39B the VAB and the
KSC support buildings. let private industry lease what they can use.

although I still thin thhe 2 pads should be converted to museums for
apoll and shuttle.

stack a model saturn 5 apollo on one pad, and enterprise on the other
both in launch configuration, and protect them with glass buildings.
If a skyscraper can be glass so can these.

Then open the pads for public viewing, some former pad rats can be
tour guides

Don't expect anything constructive or positive from Fred, and you will
not be disappointed.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”