Next Goal-Setting Effort??

Ladies and Gentlemen -

First, forgive the long post.

With the US President's Moon and Mars initiative seeming to
drift slowly off into the past, what might be the next
effort?

Of course a lot will depend on the US election and the costs
of our foreign entanglements.

This is a bit premature, to give up on the current effort
before it is clear that it is dead, but it is apparent that
it will require (at a minimum) a complete overhaul.

So let us assume that (regardless of the outcome of the US
election) that we find ourselves in early 2005 with a
commitment to fly the Shuttle for only 5 more years,
complete some version of the Station and hand it off (to
people unknown), and to depend on the Russians for access to
space for the foreseeable future (after the Shuttle is
retired). The Moon and Mars program is still mired with
little funding and support.

Could a US President re-animate the Shuttle?

Could a US President decide to continue with the Station
program - probably try to get microgravity research
re-started, etc?

Could a robotic-only program be announced?

My theorem:

A Bush administration could not reverse the decision to
retire the Shuttle. They will quietly drop back to an
expanded, robotic exploration effort with manned Lunar
exploration delayed until some future President certifies
that "we have the technology".

A Kerry administration would also retire the Shuttle and
delay the next manned vehicle until "the technology is
available to design a replacement". They will emphasize
cooperation with our partners and US astronauts will
continue to fly on the Soyuz.

Either President will hand over Station operations to a
consortium of partners.

Unfortunatly, both options leave the world dependent on a
unsteady Russian program for access to space, using an
updated but still quite antique vehicle (the Soyuz).

And both options have the US handing over a multi-billion
dollar Station to someone.

And both options have the US gutting a program and losing a
lot of expertise. Not a happy prospect.


Charles Phillips
"Drink Upstream Of The Herd, Get A Macintosh"
note feeble anti-spam attempt on Reply-To address

Ladies and Gentlemen -

First, forgive the long post.

With the US President's Moon and Mars initiative seeming to
drift slowly off into the past, what might be the next
effort?

What?! You mean were not on the Moon yet?! Its been 5 months and there is STILL
NO MOONBASE! This is absolutely inexcusable, I thought we'd be well on our way
to Mars by now. What's slowing those pokes at NASA?!

This is a bit premature, to give up on the current effort
before it is clear that it is dead, but it is apparent that
it will require (at a minimum) a complete overhaul.


Ragheads or Moon rocks? I'd take Moon Rocks over those incessantly prayerful
yammering knobs anyday, but since we don't have the equipment for going to the
Moon, I'd give those zealots a little more time to show some gratitude for all
the money we spent there. I expect their still waiting for an apology from us
for giving them too much aid and setting them on a course towards free
elections and self-government, but you can't expect any intelligence from those
protrating mummerizers, can you.

Tom

TKalbfus wrote:

Ladies and Gentlemen -

First, forgive the long post.

With the US President's Moon and Mars initiative seeming to
drift slowly off into the past, what might be the next
effort?

What?! You mean were not on the Moon yet?! Its been 5 months and there is STILL
NO MOONBASE! This is absolutely inexcusable, I thought we'd be well on our way
to Mars by now. What's slowing those pokes at NASA?!

This is a bit premature, to give up on the current effort
before it is clear that it is dead, but it is apparent that
it will require (at a minimum) a complete overhaul.


Ragheads or Moon rocks? I'd take Moon Rocks over those incessantly prayerful
yammering knobs anyday, but since we don't have the equipment for going to the
Moon, I'd give those zealots a little more time to show some gratitude for all
the money we spent there. I expect their still waiting for an apology from us
for giving them too much aid and setting them on a course towards free
elections and self-government, but you can't expect any intelligence from those
protrating mummerizers, can you.

Careful, or some nattering nabob will call you a r*****.

Tom

triples wrote:
Ladies and Gentlemen -

First, forgive the long post.

With the US President's Moon and Mars initiative seeming to
drift slowly off into the past, what might be the next
effort?

Hopefully it will be one anybody takes seriously and is
prepared to execute on. Otherwise, whats the point?


Charles Phillips
"Drink Upstream Of The Herd, Get A Macintosh"
note feeble anti-spam attempt on Reply-To address

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

Careful, or some nattering nabob will call you a r*****.


Like they don't treat Americans as their N*gg*rs anyway? An Arab murders some
American contractor, they shoot at American soldiers for no reason, we spend
billions trying to rebuild their infrastructure, restore electricity and all
they while they are taking potshots at our contractors who are trying to do
this and taking them hostage, and all this is reasonable in the Arab eyes
because they are being "occupied" and "Humiliated" by those US Soldiers in
sunglasses, that they don't squint in the bright desert glare like arabs who
are nearly blinded by UV rays is too much for them to take. Any while they
execute US hostages, they complain about Arabs who are forced to wear womens
underwear on their heads and led around by female soldiers like dogs on
leashes.

Tom

On Wed, 05 May 2004 15:59:38 +0000, triples wrote:

snip

Unfortunatly, both options leave the world dependent on a unsteady
Russian program for access to space, using an updated but still quite
antique vehicle (the Soyuz).

Though if one looks at the economics and reliability of the Soyuz compared
to all other manned vehicles, it appears quite "state of the art".

And both options have the US handing over a multi-billion dollar Station
to someone.

Cheaper for the US in the long run. Even if the US discovers a need for the ISS
(eg, analyzing dirt samples from Mars before they go to Earth), they can
always rent space for the time required.

And both options have the US gutting a program and losing a lot of
expertise. Not a happy prospect.

snip

The Space Shuttle was IMHO a bad program. It didn't work well, and it was
an obstacle to manned presence in space. That expertise wasted on the program
can now be used for private space development which should be the prime
goal (again IMHO) of NASA.


Karl Hallowell

TKalbfus wrote:
Careful, or some nattering nabob will call you a r*****.


Like they don't treat Americans as their N*gg*rs anyway? An Arab murders some
American contractor, they shoot at American soldiers for no reason, we spend
billions trying to rebuild their infrastructure, restore electricity and all
they while they are taking potshots at our contractors who are trying to do
this and taking them hostage, and all this is reasonable in the Arab eyes

You should first offer proof that the contractors being shot at were in fact
such contractors and not merely mercenaries (aka 'security contractors' in
newspeak).

because they are being "occupied" and "Humiliated" by those US Soldiers in
sunglasses, that they don't squint in the bright desert glare like arabs who
are nearly blinded by UV rays is too much for them to take. Any while they
execute US hostages, they complain about Arabs who are forced to wear womens
underwear on their heads and led around by female soldiers like dogs on
leashes.

So answer criminal by being worse criminals? what a brilliant idea.


Tom

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

On Fri, 7 May 2004 18:05:31 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
Sander Vesik made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

TKalbfus wrote:
Careful, or some nattering nabob will call you a r*****.


Like they don't treat Americans as their N*gg*rs anyway? An Arab murders some
American contractor, they shoot at American soldiers for no reason, we spend
billions trying to rebuild their infrastructure, restore electricity and all
they while they are taking potshots at our contractors who are trying to do
this and taking them hostage, and all this is reasonable in the Arab eyes

You should first offer proof that the contractors being shot at were in fact
such contractors and not merely mercenaries (aka 'security contractors' in
newspeak).

Someone protecting a food shipment is a "mercenary"?

Rand Simberg wrote:
On Fri, 7 May 2004 18:05:31 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
Sander Vesik made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

TKalbfus wrote:
Careful, or some nattering nabob will call you a r*****.


Like they don't treat Americans as their N*gg*rs anyway? An Arab murders some
American contractor, they shoot at American soldiers for no reason, we spend
billions trying to rebuild their infrastructure, restore electricity and all
they while they are taking potshots at our contractors who are trying to do
this and taking them hostage, and all this is reasonable in the Arab eyes

You should first offer proof that the contractors being shot at were in fact
such contractors and not merely mercenaries (aka 'security contractors' in
newspeak).

Someone protecting a food shipment is a "mercenary"?

Yes. Maybe you should look up what 'mercenary' means?

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

On Sat, 8 May 2004 19:04:08 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
Sander Vesik made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:


Someone protecting a food shipment is a "mercenary"?

Yes.

Not in most peoples' understanding of the word.