Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

usatoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 56 posts

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#11

Post by nickff »

speeder wrote: post #7
nickff wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with the International Space Station (ISS) is the ISS. It was an exercise in 80s and 90s design, and you could launch an equally capable science platform at a lower cost than refurbishing the current station. One of the main reasons why NASA is reluctant to replace the existing station is that they are afraid that the program would get cancelled, and they will be left with no station.

Also the I part of ISS kept the world space research orbiting around NASA. For example Brazil make every single research that requires a station (including vehicles, modules and medical science) use the ISS. Without the ISS Brazil could for example attempt its own station, or help China instead. NASA is very powerful, but if everyone help China or Russia instead, it would be bad for USA strategically.

I am not sure that many countries would want to get involved in the Chinese space program, which has always been secretive, and dominated by nationalist goals rather than scientific ones. It seems that the Russians would welcome other participants in their program, though it seems unlikely that Brazil would want to fund what appears to be a struggling and lackluster Russian program.

I am also not sure why a reduction in international collaborators for NASA would be strategically bad for the USA. I am a strong proponent of space exploration, but NASA is not an important part of US military strategy; NASA is mostly a luxury which allows the US to demonstrate its technological supremacy.

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#12

Post by nugga »

Grishnakh wrote: post #6

Oh please. Sure, they'll authorize money for some big things right now, then in a year or two they'll change their minds (after new people are elected) and pull the plug on it. They've done it over and over. The only way the US can get anything done in space exploration is if it can be fully funded and completed in less than 2 years. So a little probe here and there is completely doable, but a Space Shuttle replaceme…

Some people call SLS the senate launch system [1] because it's a blatant jobs program. It'll be inefficient and overprized project to deliver stuff that the private sector could handle much better.

[1] http://www.competitivespace.org/issues/the-senate-launch-sys...

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#13

Post by maxxxxx »

nickff wrote: post #8

The worst part of this news is the continuation of the Space Launch System (SLS), which has cost over seven billion dollars (not including Ares development costs), and is expected to end up costing forty-one billion by 2025, by which time they expect to complete a total of four launches (destination: nowhere important, and probably late). Vulcan (from ULA), New Glenn (from Blue Origin), and Falcon Heavy (from SpaceX)…

The correct acronym for SLS is Senate Launch System.

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#14

Post by nickff »

ceejayoz wrote: post #9
Grishnakh wrote: post #6

Oh please. Sure, they'll authorize money for some big things right now, then in a year or two they'll change their minds (after new people are elected) and pull the plug on it. They've done it over and over. The only way the US can get anything done in space exploration is if it can be fully funded and completed in less than 2 years. So a little probe here and there is completely doable, but a Space Shuttle replaceme…

Not sure why you're getting downvoted for this. Congressional waffling, presidents wanting to make their own mark on space policy, etc. have all done this many times. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constellation_program

The current president killed Constellation, it wasn't Congress. The next president is likely to kill SLS, or perhaps just 'limit' it, so that SLS preserves the jobs, but loses the missions.

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#15

Post by serge2k »

speeder wrote: post #7
nickff wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with the International Space Station (ISS) is the ISS. It was an exercise in 80s and 90s design, and you could launch an equally capable science platform at a lower cost than refurbishing the current station. One of the main reasons why NASA is reluctant to replace the existing station is that they are afraid that the program would get cancelled, and they will be left with no station.

Also the I part of ISS kept the world space research orbiting around NASA. For example Brazil make every single research that requires a station (including vehicles, modules and medical science) use the ISS. Without the ISS Brazil could for example attempt its own station, or help China instead. NASA is very powerful, but if everyone help China or Russia instead, it would be bad for USA strategically.

> it would be bad for USA strategically

Why?

it would be bad the US ego.

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#16

Post by 0xffff2 »

speeder wrote: post #7
nickff wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with the International Space Station (ISS) is the ISS. It was an exercise in 80s and 90s design, and you could launch an equally capable science platform at a lower cost than refurbishing the current station. One of the main reasons why NASA is reluctant to replace the existing station is that they are afraid that the program would get cancelled, and they will be left with no station.

Also the I part of ISS kept the world space research orbiting around NASA. For example Brazil make every single research that requires a station (including vehicles, modules and medical science) use the ISS. Without the ISS Brazil could for example attempt its own station, or help China instead. NASA is very powerful, but if everyone help China or Russia instead, it would be bad for USA strategically.

As a NASA employee, I find the phrase "NASA is very powerful" amussing in any context. That said, I think the far more likely outcome of the ISS being abandoned without a replacement would be that most countries would simply not invest at all in space-based research. The Russians just don't have the budget to build a station on their own, and I doubt the Chinese would welcome international collaboration.

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#17

Post by mturmon »

Bluestrike2 wrote: post #10
TeMPOraL wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My worry here is that if ISS gets shut down completely without another station being already at least partially in orbit, there won't be enough political will to start another project like that.

Historically, that's probably the most likely outcome. NASA has always faced tough political battles for funding all the way back to the middle of the Apollo program and nowhere has that been more apparent than when NASA was trying to replace one major project with another. If you're interested, John Logsdon's After Apollo? Richard Nixon and the American Space Program is a fascinating--albeit depressing--book on the…

Here's a nice Logsdon essay on the interaction between NASA and the freshly-elected President Reagan -- https://www.gwu.edu/~spi/assets/docs/The_Survival_Crisis.rev...

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#18

Post by whyenot »

nugga wrote: post #12
Grishnakh wrote: post #6

Oh please. Sure, they'll authorize money for some big things right now, then in a year or two they'll change their minds (after new people are elected) and pull the plug on it. They've done it over and over. The only way the US can get anything done in space exploration is if it can be fully funded and completed in less than 2 years. So a little probe here and there is completely doable, but a Space Shuttle replaceme…

Some people call SLS the senate launch system [1] because it's a blatant jobs program. It'll be inefficient and overprized project to deliver stuff that the private sector could handle much better. [1] http://www.competitivespace.org/issues/the-senate-launch-sys...

"Some people" in this care are the Competitive Space Task Force, a "coalition of leading conservative and libertarian thinkers from organizations committed to creating a free and competitive market for U.S. spaceflight". As one would expect from an organization with that particular point of view, they believe the SLS is a complete boondoggle and private industry should do the work.

I wish there were a more neutral source of information. The best I have found is Wikipedia, which obviously has its own limitations. Bill Nye is for it, the Planetary Society was against it, but is no longer against it.

I don't know. Why it is necessary for US taxpayers to pay for this OR subsidize companies like SpaceX is a mystery to me. Spend the money on something that will have a greater impact on the lives of those paying the bill.

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#19

Post by ceejayoz »

nickff wrote: post #14
ceejayoz wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you're getting downvoted for this. Congressional waffling, presidents wanting to make their own mark on space policy, etc. have all done this many times. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constellation_program

The current president killed Constellation, it wasn't Congress. The next president is likely to kill SLS, or perhaps just 'limit' it, so that SLS preserves the jobs, but loses the missions.

Congress was one of two scenarios I mentioned. The other, "presidents wanting to make their own mark on space policy", is exactly what Constellation was - both in its inception, and its cancellation.

Re: Senate panel authorizes money for Mars mission, shuttle replacement

#20

Post by hacker42 »

Perhaps I'm a bit cynical, but space exploration strikes me as a waste of money and energy. The universe is clearly no good for space travel, otherwise we would witness aliens visiting us. It's empty and hostile. This planet is the only realistic long-term home. Sure, space stuff gets kids into science, but I wonder how many more kids we would get into science by investing billions of dollars in education instead. We know enough about space for now. We've sent robots to Mars and the photos show it's just dust.

Right now we need to solve sustainability, global warming, super bugs, cancer, aging, friendly AI, pollution, global cooperation etc. Space can wait.

Post reply on HN