23 Jan 2012, 11:08 pm
Raptor wrote:
NASA is at the mercy of whimsical politicians as it always has been.
With the exception of myself and a minority of others, the American public could care less what the Chinese or Russians do in space because we’re more interested in “change”.
NASA’s budget may seem big to us but by comparison to other programs it’s negligible.
With the exception of myself and a minority of others, the American public could care less what the Chinese or Russians do in space because we’re more interested in “change”.
NASA’s budget may seem big to us but by comparison to other programs it’s negligible.
Oh of course. The Chinese space program on the other hand is a military venture which is why I feel it has a serious advantage. The military itself is of course a political machine but its non-democratic nature, when it comes to certain things, ensures that there will be results
I also agree wholeheartedly about the budget. It really annoys me when I hear people say "oh well so much money goes to space programs that could be spent on feeding the hungry" or other trite BS. It represents a fraction of the US military budget, to name at least one.
Raptor wrote:
I blame NASA for its own decline, as well. They don’t do nearly enough to relay the scientific fruits of their work in space to the public so therefore the public is in the dark and only sees it was waste. NASA says that a government agency can’t advertise itself but that doesn’t mean they can’t hire a contractor to do it for them like everything else.
That's true, and is another reason the Chinese have an advantage- they have no obligation to "sell" the idea or fruits to anybody in the population.
Private space companies certainly will advertise, and will also benefit the US scientifically. It could be the private industry is what is needed to rejuvenate American prestige
Raptor wrote:
One of the findings of the CAIB (Columbia Accident Investigation Board) was scheduling pressure being placed over more important issues. Of course, the contractors took the spanking. A government agency isn’t going to take the blame when they can pass it down to someone else; that’s just life in a bureaucracy.
Naturally. They wouldn't have it any other way
Raptor wrote:
Personally, I would place most all emphasis (and budget) on in low earth orbit microgravity and life sciences, Hubble telescope, and an occasional unmanned space probe in that order and forget colonizing the moon or Mars. From a budgeting standpoint, staying with what we already do is the safest bet for sustained operations.
I hear you, but at the same time I think that the past 50 years of LEO/life science has already been enough- astronauts have been in space for long periods of time. Longer, even, then a Mars trip... a lot of the research is done, it is just about creating investor confidence, I suppose. But to forgo colonization will just mean someone else will do it; and a colony on Mars, or the Moon, would probably develop into the most technologically advanced human society by virtue of its nature. I would rather it be Western than a Chinese-Iranian joint effort or something equally distasteful
Tollorin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
26 Jan 2012, 1:12 pm
