|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 08:00 PM |
Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars. | bob haller | Policy | 1 | January 6th 12 10:59 PM |
Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars. | bob haller | Astronomy Misc | 1 | January 6th 12 10:59 PM |