Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about as a backup in case all other current options are unavailable?
Just build a second Falcon Heavy. If there was a genuine possibility of SLS being competitive, that's one thing. It's another when it's worse in basically every way.
Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
51–60 of 248 posts
Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#52> Fewer robots, more humans Exactly the opposite of what they should be funding..
Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#53It's refreshing that given everything else happening, Congress is still at least functional at this level. Should be noted that many of NASA's programs are situated in predominantly conservative areas of the country. Brings lots of jobs and resources to the local economies.
No, it is not With level of debt and borrowing, cannot afford more spending
but instead we're giving a massive tax break to rich people and increasing the military budget by $150B
Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did not mention Starship, because I'm not comparing the SLS against future tech, but against tech that was finished 7 years ago and is commercially available at this very moment. And I'm contrasting this against SLS cost "projections", which invariably end up lowballing reality. I'm steel-manning the argument for the SLS as much as I can, but it's still just nonsensical. The idea we need to compete against ourselve…
>I did not mention Starship, because I'm not comparing the SLS against future tech, but against tech that was finished 7 years ago and is commercially available at this very moment. You mentioned Falcon Heavy but that has less than half the payload of SLS.
Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about as a backup in case all other current options are unavailable?
It's difficult to imagine any scenario where this happens. The only real possibilities are SpaceX going bankrupt or leaving the country. In either case, the government has substantial capacity to nationalize companies for the sake of national security during times of crises. It's also likely impossible for SpaceX to leave the US owing to ITAR and other regulations.
There is absolutely no company that is actually "too big to fail".
[1] https://www.wsj.com/tech/spacex-to-invest-2-billion-into-elo...
Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#56Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
NASA going back to the moon and Musk to Mars is nothing but pipe dreams to sell the story mode types. The US government has pivoted to animal husbandry of the populace through techno police state, and handing sycophants to power their own title, land and serfs
My ex coworkers at spacex are pretty damn motivated to get to mars, many of them despite all the Musking happening. I wouldn’t bet against them.
Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just build a second Falcon Heavy. If there was a genuine possibility of SLS being competitive, that's one thing. It's another when it's worse in basically every way.
Falcon Heavy as a TLI payload of 16,800kg. A fully decked Orion spacecraft weighs 33,446kg. Really the only alternative to SLS for Artemis would be Starship but that hasn't even achieved orbit yet (meanwhile SLS already did a successful lunar orbit and return).
In view of the launch economics, this argument still doesn’t make sense of SLS.
Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#59It's refreshing that given everything else happening, Congress is still at least functional at this level. Should be noted that many of NASA's programs are situated in predominantly conservative areas of the country. Brings lots of jobs and resources to the local economies.
Re: Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts
#60Want to get paid, by the US Federal Government, for pursuing science or technology?
From experience, in simple terms, a word: Have the work for and the funding from the US DOD, department of defense, military, for some work they really care about.
This sounds like a joke, but it's 90+% real.
For years early in my career in applied math and computing, far and away the best parts, funding, technically advanced work, growth in expertise, and working conditions were on US military work, e.g.:
(1) The FFT (fast Fourier transform) and power spectral estimation (as in the book by Blackman and Tukey) for analyzing ocean audio, close to parts of the movie The Hunt for Red October. Also, the movie uses magneto hydrodynamics (MHD), and the specialty of the guy I was working for was MHD.
(2) Some optimization using Lagrangian relaxation for nuclear war.
(3) Given many ships at sea, some Red, some Blue, and some Blue submarines, war breaks out, and how long will the ships last, in particular, the Blue submarines? Sounds impossible or nearly so, but in WWII there were some cute derivations on search at sea and some Poisson process math by a guy Koopmans, and I did a little more on the math, in assembler wrote a random number generator starting with an Oak Ridge formula, and wrote some Monte Carlo code for the whole thing -- yes, used the speeds of the ships, their detection radii, and for each Red-Blue pair the probabilities of none die, one dies, the other dies, both die.
Surprisingly, a famous probability prof was flown in for a fast review. His remark was: "No way can your Monte Carlo fathom the huge sample space tree." Well, maybe, but so what?
"After some days, say 5, let X be the number of Blue submarines still alive. Then X is a random variable and is bounded, that is, is >= 0 and Sure, it was simple, but maybe not fully too simple -- was liked, passed the review, and helped my wife and I get our Ph.D degrees.
Also the military funding let me sit alone for some days learning PL/I that later, with a tricky feature of PL/I calling back into the stack of routines called but not yet returned, used to save IBM's AI product YES/L1! Ah, military worked again!
Ah, the military may (still) be interested in computer and communications security and reliability, system design and development methodology, system monitoring, and management, and now in AI, drones, etc. A commercial server farm or network doesn't expect to be attacked by long range missiles, but DOD systems have to be robust in a war!
Once I was at the David Taylor Model Basin (big tank of water to tow candidate ship hull designs), and they were seriously interested in the Navier-Stokes equations -- maybe they still are! Uh, do they have good solutions yet?