Congress Approves NASA budget

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 7:06 pm

Dubya's "Moon, Mars and Beyond" mission for NASA is now officially flying! He might be a whacko war-monkey, but he got the dollars for NASA - so YAY!

Let's hope NASA can get the shuttle flying again real soon, and get the SpaceStation complete by 2010, so the Orbiters can be put in museums (which is where they belong).

Just as an aside, how much do you want to bet the recently validated SCRAMJET theory won't be put to any use at all until after 2025? Shame huh? Same goes for Linear Aerospike Engines...

I'm putting my money on the space elevator!

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 7:13 pm

Space exploration is cool.

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:37 am

money for nasa is always good

.

/me looks up "Linear Aerospike Engine" in google

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 2:29 am

<-- now knows a little more about Linear Aerospike Engines

why wouldn't they persuing this mobi? arn't they trying to replace the shuttles with newer, safer & more efficient single-stage-vehicles?

Genghis · Post by **Genghis** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:50 am

Because huge amounts of money are being diverted from various promising and important projects to support the Mars mission. Politics over science.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 8:52 am

Genghis wrote:Because huge amounts of money are being diverted from various promising and important projects to support the Mars mission. Politics over science.

I'd say it is vision over the staus quo.

I'll disagree with Mobius only in a new heavy lift space vehicle needs to be implimented. I'm just wondering if the lifting of material objects might better be hoisted by rockets and the astronaughts themselve lifted by something like Rutans space ship one. I think it would be more cost effective.

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 9:16 am

yeah but Genghis, single-stage-vehicles will make reaching space for all purposes easier and cheaper. it should really be the first step towards undertaking any large space-bound mission, incl a mission to mars. for example it would make trips to the intnl spacestation much easier and routine. saving resourses.

Iceman · Post by **Iceman** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:24 am

Genghis wrote:Because huge amounts of money are being diverted from various promising and important projects to support the Mars mission. Politics over science.

John F. Kennedy made a similar decision with regards to the moon program in the early 60's. The end result was a huge stimulus to the national (and world) technology base that, in my opinion, changed this world for the better. It generated countless jobs and it made our lives easier all around.

Genghis · Post by **Genghis** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 2:27 pm

Guy, guys, I'm not against a Mars mission. I'm just pointing out that nothing comes free, and that a lot of good work is going to have to be scrapped or at least put on hold indefinitely.

What worries me is that we may end up ditching the Mars mission about $20 billion into it if our resolve falters or the political winds shift.

An excellent read is Stephen Baxter's "Voyage," which presents an alternate history in which JFK doesn't get assassinated and we get to Mars in the 80's.

Personally, my immediate priorities would be continuing our "inexpensive" science probes and developing space planes. A little further out, if and when materials science is ready for it, a space elevator should become priority one. We've gotta make it cheaper to get out of the gravity well. Luckily we have private industry finally getting interested in this stuff, too.