A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 7th 12, 03:18 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.space.history
Matt Wiser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 575
Default Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars.

On Jan 6, 5:40*am, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 6, 2:34*am, "Matt Wiser" wrote:





"J. Clarke" wrote in message


ain.local...


In article 69ec7df1-59e5-474d-a7fb-
,
says...


On Jan 5, 2:43 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
In article ,
says...


"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
In article dfd09faf-259f-4754-b145-
,
says...


On Jan 3, 6:34 am, Jeff Findley

wrote:


Jeff, as I said, there's nothing wrong with dreaming big things.

After
all, that's what makes America great: the ability to dream big

things
and do the impossible. But Musk has shot his mouth off more than

once
about "retiring on Mars" and boasting that he (and he alone)

could
provide rockets for NASA. That doesn't make TPTB on Capitol Hill

who
fund NASA happy. Musk may not retire on Mars, but his grandkids

will
have that chance.


Again, how does this compare to NASA "shooting its mouth off" in

the
60's? The politicians of the time were concerned about the budget,
which was being pressured by "little" things like the Vietnam war.

If
anything, Musk is just following in the footsteps of NASA. Most

people
familiar with history will recognize that he's just "dreaming big"

and
apply the appropriate "grain of salt" to everything he says.


What Musk needs to do is follow what the Commercial
Space Federation said a year and a half ago: "We need to stop

talking
and start flying." The fact that Space X is a startup is great,

but
they need to concentrate on what NASA's paying them to do: COTS

first,
then CCDev. Once you show that you have a spaceflight

capability, not
just a demonstration or proof of concept, then start efforts

devoted
elsewhere.


Musk is doing a hell of a lot more flying of new hardware than

NASA, and
he's doing it with a hell of a lot less money than NASA ever

could. I
personally think the results coming out of SpaceX so far are

extremely
encouraging. Despite the constant stream of criticism, SpaceX is

making
steady progress by actually flying hardware. In my eyes, they're

doing
the very thing you say they should do, preparing to fly the first

COTS
mission to ISS. Manned Dragons will necessarily need to wait for

Dragon
to prove itself on COTS missions.


I've seen too many aerospace organizations flounder due to lack of
vision. Hell, over the past several decades, NASA has been

repeatedly
accused of lacking vision. I don't see Musk's vision as

detrimental to
anyone but the politicians who want to see NASA's socialistic HLV

topped
by a renamed socialistic Orion as their vision of the future.


It's time for the US to abandon the socialistic model of manned
spaceflight and transition to a capitalistic model. The US

aerospace
industry is more than mature enough for this to happen. If it

weren't,
established companies like Boeing wouldn't be working on

commercial crew
capsules.


SpaceX has little to do with my argument. They're just one of

several
US companies capable of producing a manned space vehicle. They've

just
never wanted to directly compete with the US government as that's
usually a *very* stupid thing to do. I think it's well past time

for
the US government to get out of the way and let commercial

industry take
over US manned spaceflight.


Far too many politicians are quick to cry socialism on issues like
health care, but turn a completely blind eye towards socialism

when it
comes to issues like manned spaceflight.


Jeff
--
" Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get

it
up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. "
- tinker


And you know as well as I do that commercial industry taking over

the U.S.
HSF program is not politically possible. There's NO WAY that it

would pass
Congressional muster. Nada, Zero, Zip. Said it before, Jeff, but

I'll
repeat: there is a big difference between what you would want NASA

to do and
what Congress will permit. As the adage goes in D.C.: "The

Administration
proposes, but the Congress disposes." The current Administration

found that
out when Congress rejected the FY 11 budget request and instead

wrote their
own.


And if you think the fury over "outsourcing" LEO to the private

sector was
bad enough, try doing it for BEO. Like the bobbert's proposals

(half-assed
as they are), it'd never make it out of Committee.


What makes you think that Congress has any say in the matter? All that
Congress can do is ensure that future space operations and exploration
are done without the participation of the government. And if Congress
is paying NASA to put government astronauts into space while

commercial
operators are putting non-government astronauts into orbit for a
fraction of the price, Congress is going to have some 'splaining to do
to its constituents.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


In case you haven't noticed, NASA cannot spend money on any program
without Congressional approval.


So what? *Commercial space doesn't require NASA to spend money.


And turning over all HSF to private
industry is NOT possible.


What law of physics prevents this?


Guess what? Congress can direct NASA as part
of its authorization act or its appropriations to spend X amount of
money on government vehicles for HSF.


What of it? *And why would Congress do this if there are much cheaper
commercial alternatives available?


There's an old saying that runs
in D.C. that you and those like you might be well advised to remember:
"The Administration Proposes, but the Congress Disposes." Any such
proposal to turn all HSF over to the private sector would have to be
approved by Congress. And it WON'T. It wouldn't even make it out of
committee.


And business doesn't give a crap about either. *That's the thing that
you're just plain not getting. *COMMERCIAL SPACEFLIGHT DON'T NEED NO
STEENKEENG NASA.


I want to make myself clear. *I don't give a flying fart in space about
NASA. *If Congress wants to require NASA to waste yet more money so be
it--that's about all that NASA manned spacefilght has really
accomplished since the end of Apollo is waste money. *Commercial space
will happen with or without NASA. *And once it happens Congress can
continue to fight progress for a while but eventually the voters, sick
of Congress wasting money on reinventing the wheel in the name of
national prestige, will dispose of Congress.


What I don't understand though is why you think that it's so important
to Congress that NASA develop manned spacecraft. *If they really gave a
crap they'd actually fund something that might be useful.


Dream on: in case you haven't noticed, there's such a thing as the 2010 NASA
Authorization Act; it directs NASA to build and operate a heavy-lift launch
vehicle and a crew vehicle for BEO missions. The commercial sector doesn't
handle the hard stuff-for one good reason: there's no profit to be made in
exploration. NASA and other space agencies do the hard stuff-like return to
the moon, go to NEOs and Lagrange Points, Martian orbit/moons, and Mars
itself. The private sector handles the LEO mission and-if depots prove
viable-operate such depots in support of BEO missions. Musk and the other
would-be NewSpace (or NerdSpace as I like to call them) are not gods when it
comes to HSF. And in case you've forgotten, "national prestige" still counts
A LOT. The NASA authorization act passed by 98-0 in the Senate, and by over
300 votes in the House (there were only 40 or so votes against-and half of
those were angry about Constellation being canned). Space is bipartisan, and
since the key members of Congress in both Houses that sit on the relevant
committees that deal with space are from "space states", you get the idea.
Or don't you?- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


did you see the news yesterday? the military budget is being cut.

guess what overspending cant go on forever..

and the coming cuts in entitlements like SS and medicare will get lots
of looking at other spending including nasa.

the days of buying votes will meaningless jobs must end- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


More chicken little crap. And in case you didn't notice, the defense
budget will still be growing when these cuts are finished. Come back
when you come out of your fantasy-filled bubble and get into the real
world.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars. Raymond Yohros Policy 5 January 11th 12 09:00 PM
Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars. bob haller Policy 1 January 6th 12 11:59 PM
Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars. bob haller Astronomy Misc 1 January 6th 12 11:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.