Posted on 08/16/2009 12:22:46 AM PDT by Nachum
WASHINGTON -- NASA doesn't have nearly enough money to meet its goal of putting astronauts back on the moon by 2020 -- and it might be the wrong place to go, anyway. That's one of the harsh messages emerging from a sweeping review of NASA's human space flight program.
The Human Space Flight Plans Committee, appointed by President Barack Obama and headed by retired aerospace executive Norman Augustine, has been trying to stitch together some kind of plausible strategy for America's manned space program. The panel has struggled to find options that stay under the current budget and include missions worthy of the cost and effort.
(Excerpt) Read more at miamiherald.com ...
The list, ping
Abortions and death care management are more important
Democrats THE PARTY OF DEATH
You cannot pay for a space program with printed money.
NASA could be funded by eliminating the Department of Education and numerous other unnecessary federal programs.
What are the projections for when we will have enough money to send Bambi and the czars to Mars?
I would settle for just BHO if the payload is a problem.
Why not have NASA completely merge with the United States Air Force. They cooperate on pilots and hardware. The Air Force budget is much more than that. Minus well take advantage of the technology the Air Force can give.
Whitey on the Moon
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face and arms began to swell.
(and Whitey’s on the moon)
I can’t pay no doctor bill.
(but Whitey’s on the moon)
Ten years from now I’ll be payin’ still.
(while Whitey’s on the moon)
The man jus’ upped my rent las’ night.
(’cause Whitey’s on the moon)
No hot water, no toilets, no lights.
(but Whitey’s on the moon)
I wonder why he’s uppi’ me?
(’cause Whitey’s on the moon?)
I wuz already payin’ ‘im fifty a week.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Taxes takin’ my whole damn check,
Junkies makin’ me a nervous wreck,
The price of food is goin’ up,
An’ as if all that shit wuzn’t enough:
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face an’ arm began to swell.
(but Whitey’s on the moon)
Was all that money I made las’ year
(for Whitey on the moon?)
How come there ain’t no money here?
(Hmm! Whitey’s on the moon)
Y’know I jus’ ‘bout had my fill
(of Whitey on the moon)
I think I’ll sen’ these doctor bills,
Airmail special
(to Whitey on the moon)
Now, with computers (chances are the one you are using now would run rings around everything on board the Apollo) instead of slide rules, we 'can't do it'?
It is a question of direction and will, not ability.
We’ve already been mooned by Obammy.
Looks to me like the commies in DC spend more on the DOE than NASA.
About sums it up
NASA would not be where it is at in regards to space technology if it were not for the Air Force and its investment in the space program. All the rockets dating back to the 1960s were ICBMs of Air Force origin and design. Taking over NASA would very easy.
DoD would love to have NASA under their belt.
I think I’m imagining where they want to go next, built a second international space station after they deorbit the current one. Nothing says innovation like building, and then demolishing, a succession of stations that go nowhere.
As of May 2009 the station is 82.8% complete. Charles Bolden Jr. has stated in a recent article that he plans to extend the lifetime of the International Space Station beyond 2016. My personal guess until 2020. Remember, no since we do not have the Shuttle, we will have to depend on the Russians for almost everything. This bolster my arguement if the USAF would be in charge of manned flight we might wrestle away charge of space station affairs away from the Russians.
The Russians are already making plans to take off some of its modules from the ISS and use those modules as a platform for their own space station
What?! Just fire up the presses and print more money just like you are doing for everyone else.
Obama-the-antiAmerican Marxist has already given MORE to ACORN
and terrorists than NASA received in this century.
We can’t go to the moon, we are still too busy paying off last years campaign debts to our buddies.
it would be a cultural mismatch. they each do the same things very differently. however, our national history of exploration and expansion was not led by a civilian agency. the military has always led the way or supported the ivilians who got there before them.
The calculator on your desk has more computing power than they had on the lander.
Funny clip.
I vividly recall watching Neil Armstrong late in the evening on July 20, 1969. It was very late for an eight year old, but my father said I would tell my grandchildren about seeing the first man walk on the moon. The next morning, I met with a freshly decorated classroom (It was a summertime art program), all in an Apollo theme, with “A SMALL STEP FOR A MAN, A GIANT LEAP FOR MANKIND” in proud block silver letters on a deep blue background above the front chalkboard. It seemed that we were accelerating toward a bright future in the heavens. Yet, humankind has not set foot on the moon since Apollo 17 in December of 1972. Have we simply stumbled after a great leap, or have the tools to reach for the stars been laid too far from our collective grasp?
One Scenario for Lunar Profit.
The technology presently exists for individuals and corporations to profit from the resources on the moon. The flat lowlands, or "mare" regions, formed about 4 billion years ago when immense asteroid impacts fractured the crust, allowing the lavas from 200 miles deep to erupt into vast seas. Billions of years of pounding by meteorites, micrometeorites and solar and cosmic radiation has yielded a powder 2 to 10 meters deep in the lowlands, and 100s to 1000s of meters in the highlands. This regolith layer contains minerals containing aluminum, calcium, iron, magnesium and a remarkably high content of titanium. These and other abundant minerals are the building blocks for ceramics, glass and fiberglass, all of which can be used in refining and producing metals for structures, for tools and, ultimately, for export.
Profitable operation on the lunar surface would be characterized by a high initial cost, followed by very low operating costs. The present $10,000 per pound maximum cost for exporting materials from the earth’s surface obviously inhibits immediate large-scale lunar activities. Yet, lunar operations could begin with small-scale production of ceramics and metals for structures and tools. The absence of an atmosphere makes solar energy abundant, especially at the poles, where ice has recently been discovered. A small solar panel powered refinery using electrolysis in a vacuum could separate raw materials based upon temperature, while producing copious amounts of oxygen. Ceramic refractory can be manufactured using the same process. Initial operations would additionally need to include the capacity to shuttle to a lunar orbiting platform, given the inability of humans to be indefinitely subjected to low gravity.
Once the lunar base takes root, materials for the construction of additional facilities can be exported to the lunar orbiter and production capabilities will increase, as the base begins to flower. Semiconductors abundant in regolith can be used to construct photovoltaic cells. Aluminum oxide powered rockets can be fabricated for transport to and from the lunar surface. A magnetic accelerator can be employed to eject a steady flow of materials into orbit for collection by an orbiting facility or collection vehicles. Centrifuges to mimic 1g environments can be constructed on the surface and in orbit, to enable long-term habitation by humans and their sources of food. Surface operations would continually focus on collection of materials for export to the orbiter and exploration for potentially large quantities of pure materials.
The orbiting facility will evolve into a semi-refined material collection, manufacturing and transportation hub. The refined products can contribute to the expansion of the orbital structure and to fabricate transport vehicles, tools, etc. It will have the advantage of continuous solar energy for power and thermal applications. Product from the surface may be used as raw material to fabricate larger scale electrolysis refineries. Eventually, large quantities of high margin product can be exported back to earth for commercial sale.
The Tools To Meet An Undeveloped Expanse.
Capital formation using only available raw materials located in an undeveloped environment was once central to our American national consciousness. European monarchies made initial capital outlays to explore the new world. However, national governments did not develop the western hemisphere. Economic innovations such as the corporate form enabled almost any European entrepreneur to access sufficient capital to finance journeys for commercial benefit. New world development flowed from the corporate form. The great fortunes that ensued coincided with increases in European population longevity, greater knowledge and technical innovation, all of which greatly enhanced the quality of life of mankind.
In America, the establishment of the Plymouth Colony, which nearly winked out of existence in 1622, was one of our first lessons teaching the need to provide free access to capital. The founders communal means of distributing goods and services induced the colonists to “retard much employment” and “languish in misery.” To increase production, in 1623 each family received a plot of land to work and manage. The following harvest resulted in such abundance, that Governor Bradford, "sett aparte a day of thanksgiveing." Of 99 first comers in 1621, nearly half perished, while in 1623, “died not one man, woman or child.” A national day of Thanksgiving is still celebrated today.
The development of an American transportation network likewise did not develop as a result of government expenditures. In 1828 there were three miles of railway; in 1830, forty-one miles; in 1840, 2,200; in 1850, 7,500, and; in 1860, 29,000. So what accounts for this parabolic acceleration of the rate of capital formation between 1830 and 1860?
The first passenger rail line in the United States was the Ithaca & Oswego line, which ran for thirty miles connecting Ithaca to the Erie Canal. The railway opened in 1834. It was built in with private capital contributions, but the state charter reserved the right to regulate rates. The early operations of the railway were characterized by operational and maintenance problems and a series of fatal accidents. Nevertheless, the first steam powered engine began operations on the line in 1837. However, the rail line failed to thrive - on July 4th 1842, Ithaca's leaders attempted a jaunt along the line to Owego for a celebration, but they had to get out and push when the engine failed five miles short of its destination. The Cayuga & Susquehana Railroad acquired the line at a bankruptcy sale in 1843.
The New York General Railroad Act of 1850 passed partially in response to a public outcry from the scandalously close relationship between railroad companies and politicians. The act permitted the use of a totally private corporate form for railway ownership and operation, without the reserved right to set rates. The act also permitted the acquisition of property by eminent domain.
By October of 1851, coal trains began to arrive in Ithaca. The old Oswego line was rebuilt in 1855 by George Scranton and it was later incorporated into the Erie Lackawana. Ultimately, the line carried passengers and freight including up to one hundred coal cars per day.
The New York legislation became a model for other states. The sheer number of publicly traded railroad securities indicates the growth in infrastructure that resulted when transportation companies had free access to capital and the ability to own private property. In 1835 only 3 Railroads were traded on Wall Street, by 1850 38 were traded, and by 1855 railroad accounted for half the negotiable securities in the U.S.
Sadly, the mostly unrestrained entrepreneurial spirit that forged the expansion and construction of the United States has increasingly become a target for those who seek to provide for even greater good. Yet, like in the Plymouth Colony or with the Ithaca & Oswego Railway Company, nearly every attempt to legislate egalitarian ideals has resulted in the restriction of the free access to capital for entrepreneurs. The inevitable result is lost opportunity and economic stagnation.
Tools Beyond Our Reach
So, has mankind stumbled or stagnated, when it comes to reaching toward the moon? What follows may surprise you. As you read the following selected quotes from the “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies,” ratified by the United States in 1967, you should ask whether you, as an investor, would place the extremely high risk portion of you portfolio in a venture prohibited from securing rights to private property or privacy to protect proprietary holdings:
Article I
The exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scientific development, and shall be the province of all mankind.
Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind, on a basis of equality and in accordance with international law, and there shall be free access to all areas of celestial bodies.
There shall be freedom of scientific investigation in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, and States shall facilitate and encourage international co-operation in such investigation. Article II
Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.
* * * Article XI
In order to promote international co-operation in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space, States Parties to the Treaty conducting activities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, agree to inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations as well as the public and the international scientific community, to the greatest extent feasible and practicable, of the nature, conduct, locations and results of such activities. On receiving the said information, the Secretary-General of the United Nations should be prepared to disseminate it immediately and effectively.
Article XII
All stations, installations, equipment and space vehicles on the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be open to representatives of other States Parties to the Treaty on a basis of reciprocity. Such representatives shall give reasonable advance notice of a projected visit, in order that appropriate consultations may be held and that maximum precautions may be taken to assure safety and to avoid interference with normal operations in the facility to be visited.
Article XVI
Any State Party to the Treaty may give notice of its withdrawal from the Treaty one year after its entry into force by written notification to the Depositary Governments. Such withdrawal shall take effect one year from the date of receipt of this notification.
http://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=0800000280128cbd
The solution for stimulating the stagnating reach for the stars should be obvious to the majority of our policy makers. Massive expenditures by central governments may be the right formula for proving that great feats of exploration can bear fruit. However, for sustained activity in undeveloped expanses to take root, entrepreneurs need free access to capital and the ability to own private property. Without it, the Plymouth Colony would have amounted to nothing more than a historical footnote. The Ithaca & Oswego Railway Company is a historical footnote. Apollo 17 should not become one.
The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 is toxic to the exploration and economic development in the heavens. As the “President’s Commission on Implementation of United States Space Exploration” notes, the uncertainty created by the existing treaty regimes, “could strangle a nascent space based industry in its cradle; no company will invest millions of dollars in developing a product to which their legal claim is uncertain.” An amendment to include grants of celestial private property or an outright withdrawal from the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 will be the first step toward equipping American entrepreneurs with the tools they need to reach for the stars.
ACORN got over $400 Billion from the Stimulus Bill alone. Enough to put every soul in China and India on the Dem voter roles...
The program currently costs $9b and there’s no room in the budget. Hmmm, how many years would the $800b+ porkulus have funded?
It would be “racist” for only Americans to go back to the Moon.
Which rasies the interesting question: what will happened to all those Vandenburg AF shuttle launches?
On a side note - there are those that claim there is a long standing secret space program using “different” tech, and NASA’s manned program is just for show.
I also find it interesting that the late 19th and 20th Centuries saw rapid inovations and major inventions, most of which seemed to come to a screeching halt around the late 60s; now days inovation and invention move slowly with few really new things poping up - and those all seem to be refinements on existing tech - ex: computers, cell phones.
Like some one is/has collected all the really new stuff - ex: electricity, internal combustion, fire etc - and hidden it away from view.
Just saying.
Short answer to you great piece: no.
“And what Obama’s planning for the entire U.S. economy is not “too ambitious”?”
Ambitious = spending lots of money. Hussein’s plans = destroying lots of money.
So there you have it: anyting which furthers knowledge, independance, freedom etc is too costly; anything which destroys the US economy and creats a monoculture reducing the US to 3rd world status is good.
Remember, Hussein grew up in a monoculture (muslim) and longs to be the Architech of (in his eye) returning the US to that monoculture.
“NASA’s moon plan too ambitious, Obama panel says”
Obama knows by experience all about plans that are too ambitious, Unfortunately, he doesn’t know it.
There were 'pure' military missions with the Space Shuttle. Before that, there was an Air Force version of Project Gemini complete with their own astronauts and a modified version of the capsule. The Air Force project was in support of the "Manned Orbital Laboratory" (MOL) -- which was a reconnaissance platform. The Air Force lost interest in the project as unmanned recon satellites became more capable.
This points to the basic problem of putting manned space exploration under the Pentagon. Their mission is national defense. If a program can't fit under that umbrella it's going to get short-shrift.
“From Kennedy’s announcement to the moon in well under a decade.
Now, with computers (chances are the one you are using now would run rings around everything on board the Apollo) instead of slide rules, we ‘can’t do it’?
It is a question of direction and will, not ability.”
The top marginal tax rates were 91% when Kennedy made that announcement and it was at least 70% for most of the 60s. We don’t have that kind of revenue anymore. Are you willing to trade another landing on the moon for tax rates like that?
Somebody needs to remind these luddite communards that the Soviet Union had a large space program, and Red China still has one, so it is ideologically acceptable after all.
Really, honest, lefties, don’t let all that industry and US military involvement fool you, spaceflight is politically correct.
///////
Is it a question of revenue or one of priority?
How much were we spending on providing 'services' for illegal aliens? How about all the programs we spent the money on, LBJ's 'great society', the war on povety (pull out! It's a quagmire!), all the myriad social programs used as an excuse to invade our daily lives and which have sewn the seeds of the Socialism we are seeing grow like kudzu in our government today?
I recall the shift, the crap about "Why spend money in space when we have problems right here on Earth?", yadda yadda yadda.
Here is my solution, and it does not involve marginal tax rates of 91%: Change emphasis. Real welfare reform, send the illegals home and secure the border, downsize invasive social programs, and get America off the teat. Look upthread (post 9) at the amount NASA spends versus HHS. Giving NASA one tenth of the HHS budget would put us on Mars in a decade, not just the moon, and taxes would not have to change.
The lesson learned by the colonization of the United states,is one part of history they will not repeat.
A colony is only a colony, while it is dependent. The moment it becomes self sufficient, the power base changes.
A independent off world society is uncontrollable and scares the living hell out of those who want to run this planet under their collective thumb.
It's not technology,blocking the moon and mars, its selfish power.
Within a few years, there were the HP RPN programmables, TI had a programmable one (algebraic notation) with magnetic strips to store programs and an optional printer, and the average $30 calculator (about 10 hours of work at minimum wage) would do trig functions and had memory.
Within a decade, the personal computer was making inroads, and now a cell phone has capabilities that were pretty much science fiction then.
While the demand for such cannot be solely credited to the space race, the weight/size constraints of the aerospace industry were a driving force in the economy which led to those developments and so many others we take for granted.
Yet, lunar operations could begin with small-scale production of ceramics and metals for structures and tools.
///////////////
Yeah. Why not send some of these little mobile-marsbots to the moon to mine and produce?
there....fixed it.
Oh we have the revenue alright - it just goes to entitlements and pork. If we still had the will, then the money is there. No need to raise taxes. Just look aat the chart.
“It is a question of direction and will, not ability.”
And that is the nub of the problem. No will, not since 72. Back then we were churning out engineers by the truck load, now it is lawyers. See the problem?
“Giving NASA one tenth of the HHS...”
Give NASA the same budget as HHS has now and give HHS NASA’s current budget, remove all PC restraints, restart the Orion program killed in the 60s and give us neat slogans equivilant to “Mars by 1965, Venus by 1975”.
Teach the public that a serious manned space program would not only gurantee full employment, a heavy industry rivaled by none, far better schools, but also raise the US standard of living and health care beyond any other country in the world bar none. Not to mention the greenweenies could have cheap solar cells to power their toy cars.
And, like the US did during the Apollo program, give Hope and Wonder as a free gift to all humanity. (Not the Hussein variety.)
Not only that but we’d have some place to go, if socialists ever took over the US and wanted to micromanage our lives -— opps.
+1000
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.