New Budget Kills NAsa'S Moon Colony Plans?

[amicus]

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/abcs-world-news-diane-sawyer-question-day-us/story?id=9718056

http://my.opera.com/leirom/blog/show.dml/466702


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_outpost_(NASA)#Other_countries.27_plans

Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) plans a manned lunar landing around 2020 that would lead to a manned lunar base by 2030; however, there is no budget yet for this project.[7]

China National Space Administration (CNSA) has commenced the Chang'e program for exploring the Moon to investigate the prospect of lunar mining, specifically for mining isotope helium-3 for use as an energy source on Earth.[8] CNSA director Luan Enjie has stated, humans must learn to leave Earth and "set up self-sufficient extraterrestrial homeland."[8] China launched the Chang'e 1 robotic lunar orbiter on October 10, 2007.

~~~

More than just a few Literoticians were alive to experience the first Earth Satellite to orbit the Globe, Sputnik, I think it was called.

Many remember where they were in 1969 when Man landed on the Moon; I was doing a free-lance article for the New York Times from a Student lounge in Tampa, Florida.

What role in the human psyche does the exploration of space occupy?

Is it important for the US to be the leader in such efforts?

There are over 400 comments on one of the links...as a guage of what others think...

Amicus

 

[Handley_Page]

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/abcs-world-news-diane-sawyer-question-day-us/story?id=9718056

http://my.opera.com/leirom/blog/show.dml/466702


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_outpost_(NASA)#Other_countries.27_plans



~~~

More than just a few Literoticians were alive to experience the first Earth Satellite to orbit the Globe, Sputnik, I think it was called.

Many remember where they were in 1969 when Man landed on the Moon; I was doing a free-lance article for the New York Times from a Student lounge in Tampa, Florida.

What role in the human psyche does the exploration of space occupy?

Is it important for the US to be the leader in such efforts?

There are over 400 comments on one of the links...as a gauge of what others think...

Amicus

Yes, Amicus, it was Sputnik 1. It would have been a really good piece of useful hardware, but it weighed too much. In the end, and just so they could show the leaders "something", up went a football-sized package with four dipole aerials whizzing around going 'Beep'. Not that one could actually measure much from its signals, but it is a PR triumph, only slightly marred by the fact that the Jodrel Bank radio telescope actually heard it first.

Whether the West can afford vastly expensive projects now is another story. Personally, I doubt it.

 

[amicus]

As I recall an historical documentary, Jodrell Banks was informed by the Soviets of the time and frequency of the satellite for confirmation.

I read the first page or so of commentaries in one of the links, it is pretty much a toss-up between those who shared your thought about the expense and those who spoke on behalf of the science to be gained by continued exploration.

I tend to view this as a political act, preferring to contemplate the navel of the world instead of looking outwards to the stars.

The cutting of the Space budget does not surprise me...I predicted it over a year ago as I did the construction of new Nuclear Power Plants, to a Nuclear Engineer who was looking at a scarce job market.

Amicus

 

[Weird Harold]

Whether the West can afford vastly expensive projects now is another story. Personally, I doubt it.

I suppose that the 3 billion cut from NASA's budget or even the entirety of NASA's 21 billion requested budget could be considered "vastly expensive" by some people, but it's just pocket change when compared to social programs that run into the hundreds of billions or even trillions of dollars.

The US Lunar program as a percentage of the total US budget was less than half a percent. The entire space program is barely half a percent of the budget.

Those of us who are old enough to remember Sputnick are also old enough to remember what televison and telephone service were like before Echostar, Telestar and all of the other NASA-led programs that the luddites of the time considered a waste of tax dollars that could be better spent on the War on Poverty and other social programs.

 

[amicus]

"i" before "e', except after "c"; so is it Wierd Harold or Weird Harold or does it matter?

I am somewhat puzzled concerning the overall function of NASA, aside from the budget funds they receive from the Federal Government.

All of the 'hardware' for Shuttle and Rocket construction is farmed out to private industry, to the lowest bidder, so I have read and heard.

If a conglomeration of private corporations could make use of the launch facilities of NASA and the coordination of telemetry and tracking from ground and satellite resources, it could well be a boost for the actual exploration and exploitation of the Moon and the Asteroid belt outside Mars as profitable resources.

I do wonder if private enterprise could mount a competitive race for a Moon Base if other Nations provide financial backing.

Someone said, and I agree, the future of man is in space. It would be like postponing Columbus, Magellan, Ponce de Leon and other adventurous explorers, to not utilize the knowledge gained thus far and capitalize on whatever can be learned in space.

Amicus

 

[TxRad]

"i" before "e', except after "c"; so is it Wierd Harold or Weird Harold or does it matter?

I am somewhat puzzled concerning the overall function of NASA, aside from the budget funds they receive from the Federal Government.

All of the 'hardware' for Shuttle and Rocket construction is farmed out to private industry, to the lowest bidder, so I have read and heard.

If a conglomeration of private corporations could make use of the launch facilities of NASA and the coordination of telemetry and tracking from ground and satellite resources, it could well be a boost for the actual exploration and exploitation of the Moon and the Asteroid belt outside Mars as profitable resources.

I do wonder if private enterprise could mount a competitive race for a Moon Base if other Nations provide financial backing.

Someone said, and I agree, the future of man is in space. It would be like postponing Columbus, Magellan, Ponce de Leon and other adventurous explorers, to not utilize the knowledge gained thus far and capitalize on whatever can be learned in space.

Amicus

Weird is one of those weird exception words in the English language.

Do you have any idea what the insurance alone would cost in the private sector?

two kids put a camera in space and returned it for less than a couple of hundred bucks. The company here in Texas that has an airplane carry the space vehicle to altitude and then launch it into space. Much cheaper but with far less payload capacity.

NASA does a damned good job even with half the government looking over it's shoulder and trying to shut it down. Safety is first and foremost. Every system is redundant, redundant just for that reason.

Even the lowest bidders on most parts are still some of the best in the business. You have to have the credentials just to get on the list to bid.

Last but not least is the old joke, what is an elephant? A mouse built to government specs.

 

[Weird Harold]

"i" before "e', except after "c"; so is it Wierd Harold or Weird Harold or does it matter?

From Google's results list -- once I forced it to search for the "i before e" spelling:

Urban Dictionary: wierd
wierd - 9 definitions - Used by people that cannot correctly spell the word "weird."
www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wierd - Cached - Similar​

I am somewhat puzzled concerning the overall function of NASA, aside from the budget funds they receive from the Federal Government.

...

If a conglomeration of private corporations could make use of the launch facilities of NASA and the coordination of telemetry and tracking from ground and satellite resources, ...

NASA's purpose is (was) to make those launch facilities and coordinated telemetry possible -- facilities beyond the necessary return on investment and amortization schedules acceptable to any privately held, profit motivated corporation or individual.

A conglomeration of private corporations could indeed probably make good use of NASA's facilities -- although Virgin Galactic's business model would be viable if it relied on that kind of infrastructure -- but theose facilities wouldn't exist without the 50's and 60's space race or the continued later manned space programs.

Private sector space programs, like Virgin Galactic, are really only possible because of the government sponsored aerospace research and education programs around the world.

 

[amicus]

The case you appear to make is one that many advocate, but permit me to raise some doubts.

The Steam engine was a private invention without government subsidies or even support until it proved valuable.

The Internal Combustion engine likewise, was a private affair until the Military found a use for it as was the Wright Brothers flimsey flying machines.

Electric Generation was a private venture, even a competition between Edison and Westinghouse before any government contracted to have their cities and streets electrified.

Radio communications by Marconi and others proved their value before others showed a financial interest.

Stoddard in America couldn't get the government or the military interested in Rocketry until the practicality was displayed.

Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, if memory serves, commercialized the personal computer.

I emphasize the individual nature of these inventions and discoveries to underline the individual nature of a single mans' mind that is the motive force behind all great innovations.

I could offer more, from memory, in the fields of medicine and astronomy and physics and even the great radio networks of the 30's ABC, CBS, NBC, although one was the Mutual Broadcasting system, all private ventures and not as a result of government.

But you will either visualize my thesis or you will not; I have provided sufficient opposition to at least cause you to doubt the efficacy of the collective over the individual.



Amicus

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

To be fair the Manhattan Project, the Panama Canal, AlCan Highway, and National Parks are hugely successful government endeavors.

James Q. Wilson explored bureaucracy in his book, and determined what factors and conditions make government the best provider, and how government fails.

 

[amicus]

To be fair the Manhattan Project, the Panama Canal, AlCan Highway, and National Parks are hugely successful government endeavors.

James Q. Wilson explored bureaucracy in his book, and determined what factors and conditions make government the best provider, and how government fails.[/QUOTE]

~~~

Well, James, maybe...you might also cite the gas chambers as the most efficient final solution...

Factories producing automobiles and refrigerators were turned into tank and ammunition producing entities during wartime. The Manhattan Project may qualify as an exception but still it was Fermi and Oppenheimer who did the brainwork, government provided the security, but so does private enterprise, but with an uncertain product at the end, it is unlikely that private enterprise would have taken the risks involved.

The Panama Canal, a failed French project, involved Internation boundaries but it was and is a profit making venture and could quite well have been done with private venture funds.

Roads and Highways....well...considering some Toll Roads are in existence, I think I even paid to cross over the Golden Gate and the one crossing the Columbia River near Astoria, Oregon, once upon a time. I would venture to guess that private road building, given the same gasoline tax we all pay at the pumps would have done a better job for less money and included, perhaps by law, a method of continual upkeep funded by profits from gas taxes.

I would sell all the National Parks to the highest bidder and abolish the Forest Service and the BLM to reduce the size of government.

My final argument is that these ventures are not within the purview of government in a strict reading of the Constitution. While they may be popular, if they are not Constitutional then they should not exist.

Amicus

 

[TxRad]

Brain power ain't the problem with space exploration. Money and security are. National security back in the cold war. No one wanted nuclear warheads sitting on the moon. Too easy to drop one wherever you want and no way to defend.

The cold war may be over but that type thinking isn't. If China starts a high end space program, NASA will be able to write it's own ticket.

Sell the National parks huh, I figured you above all would understand those. The National Forestry service isn't much of a problem. They make their money off the management of those Parks. They even make a profit most of the time.

BLM on the other hand causes more problems than it solves.

Highways aren't profitable enough for the private sector even with all the fuel tax's. You want a shock. Check out what a trucking company pays for just one truck a year on roads. They pay by the ton mile.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Sorry TEX, Department of the Interior operates the national parks; the Forest Service operates the national forests.

 

[TxRad]

Sorry TEX, Department of the Interior operates the national parks; the Forest Service operates the national forests.

The National Parks and Forests come under the Department of the Interior, They are both operated by the Forestry service, which also comes under the Department of the Interior.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The National Parks and Forests come under the Department of the Interior, They are both operated by the Forestry service, which also comes under the Department of the Interior.

National Forests are part of the Department of Agriculture.

http://www.fs.fed.us/

 

[Weird Harold]

I emphasize the individual nature of these inventions and discoveries to underline the individual nature of a single mans' mind that is the motive force behind all great innovations.

All of your examples have/had clear financial returns over a relatively short period. Space Exploitation, like transcontinental railroads and the european explorers of Columbus' era got nowhere relying on private venture capitalism. It took goverment intervention and funding for the individuals with the vision and genius to get anything accomplished.

It would be nice if private venture capitalism could see beyond the bottom line and return on investment numbers. But, like the Panama Canal private venture capitalism tried and failed at least three times before Pres. T.R declared it a "National Security Issue" and put the economy of the entire nation behind the project, some things are simply more than any visionary genius can get financed by anyone concerned about making a profit.