Obama/McCain and space exploration

[CrackerBarrel]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

We can barely afford gas to get cross town (at least now it's managable) so I think we are a bit too broke to be thinking about going to another planet so we can f*ck that one up too.

NASA has to get rid of the old shuttle fleet and find reasosn why they keep going up there (fouling the weather while they are at it) so it will be worth something.

We finally agree on something. I like the space program and think it is exciting, but right now most of our manned missions seem to be going into space for the sake of flying up there. I haven't heard any convincing evidence of what the manned space program has accomplished in recent years (since they repaired Hubble). The last big crossover into mainstream consumer technology was things created during the development of the shuttle. That's been a pretty good while.

[PeppyGPhiB]

It's well known in the aerospace community that the current space shuttle is getting ready to be retired. A new space shuttle is being designed. Cheerfulgreek, as you can imagine, this will NOT be cheap. Also, in case you missed it, NASA has been doing research on Mars, just not with people on the ground there. It's even been in the news recently. We have learned a lot from the space program, but in these times when we can't afford to run our country on this planet, I think cutting space trips is a wise decision.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

It's well known in the aerospace community that the current space shuttle is getting ready to be retired. A new space shuttle is being designed. Cheerfulgreek, as you can imagine, this will NOT be cheap. Also, in case you missed it, NASA has been doing research on Mars, just not with people on the ground there. It's even been in the news recently. We have learned a lot from the space program, but in these times when we can't afford to run our country on this planet, I think cutting space trips is a wise decision.

Yes, this is correct. I was watching a documentary this past weekend on the space program, called "Space Shuttle Disaster." Like Peppy said, the shuttles are being retired. After the Columbia disaster, NASA (well the Columbia disaster advisory board) re-evaluated why they were taking people up in space. So they are coming out with new "shuttles" that are going to be designed like the early Apollo rockets were. They will have one "shuttle" designed to carry cargo, like things they need to repair the international space station with, and one to carry humans.

The whole idea of redesigning these rockets was to prevent human death like what happened with Columbia or with Challenger.

NASA's funding has been cut before, with the Nixon administration and it wasn't truly until George W. Bush (our current president) that NASA gained more funding for human space exploration.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

It's well known in the aerospace community that the current space shuttle is getting ready to be retired. A new space shuttle is being designed. Cheerfulgreek, as you can imagine, this will NOT be cheap. Also, in case you missed it, NASA has been doing research on Mars, just not with people on the ground there. It's even been in the news recently. We have learned a lot from the space program, but in these times when we can't afford to run our country on this planet, I think cutting space trips is a wise decision.

o.k. I understand that it's not exactly cheap. It would probably cost about 20 to 30 billion dollars which is a lot, but it's roughly in the same range as a single military procurement for a new weapons system. As I can remember I think the United States gave Mexico a similar amount some time in 1995. I think if it's spread over 20 years, with the 1st ten years developing hardware and the next 10 years flying missions, I'm thinking it would represent about 8% and 12% of the existing NASA budget. I mean, I seriously think for the sake of opening a new world to human civilization, it's a sum that this country can easily afford. Of course after we get out of the financial situation that our moron president has gotten us into.

Yep, we've been to Mars before. In 1976 Viking 1 landed on Mars. We've actually been doing research on Mars since the 50s, but without landing someone there, we're missing a lot. Yep, you're right about the shuttle, but we wouldn't need it to go to Mars anyway. Exploring Mars requires no miraculous new technologies, no orbiting spaceports, no anti-matter propulsion systems or gigantic interplanetary crusiers. Seriously, why can't we travel there the same way we got to the moon, just with the technology we have now? Even the temperature there can support life. I mean, I know it can drop down to -130 degrees there, but we could develop equipment to protect us from that. During the day though, it gets to the mid 60s. I just think it's totally realistic. We planned to go in 2000, so I know we have the technology. We've just been throwing away money to a country that doesn't even want us there. Thanks a lot Bush.

I really hope Obama doesn't cut spending on the space program. I think it's very important to give NASA the funding that's needed for space exploration. The hell with Iraq.