NASA vs Congress

[blaaah]

Congress has previously given NASA the task of making a rocket capable of going beyond low Earth orbit by 2016, but NASA now says "We will not commit to a date that has a low probability of being achieved,".
The reply from Congress is that the date "is not optional".
Going on to say "NASA must use its decades of space know-how and billions of dollars in previous investments to come up with a concept that works,".

 

[Anes]

Meh

There's no intelligent life within a light year of earth anyway so what's the point tbh. Sounds like a suit telling a scientist how to do his job.

Edit: facepalm, just re read your post. It's 3am here...

 

[Dotini]

Congress has previously given NASA the task of making a rocket capable of going beyond low Earth orbit by 2016, but NASA now says "We will not commit to a date that has a low probability of being achieved,".
The reply from Congress is that the date "is not optional".
Going on to say "NASA must use its decades of space know-how and billions of dollars in previous investments to come up with a concept that works,".

Sounds shocking, but please provide your linky.

 

[linkov]

How many years did the moon program take? And what sort of technology did we have back then?

NASA is NOT without faults. The new rockets they are working on are ridiculous and only useful in the "short" term as a shuttle replacement (good idea?)

We will probably never see people on mars in our lifetime.

 

[Dotini]

In my view, it's almost ridiculous to send men to the Moon, let alone Mars, in the current regime of debt and wars. I'm more than satisfied with NASA, since they are sending up numerous unmanned probes that are revolutionizing our view of the Sun, planetary science and the universe of stars and galaxies.

Respectfully,
Dotini

 

[blaaah]

Sounds shocking, but please provide your linky.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19996-stormy-words-over-nasas-rocket-deadline.html

We will probably never see people on mars in our lifetime.

The youngest children of today are expected to live until 150years average life expectancy, so they have another 140 years or so to do it under the "our lifetime" scenario.

Anyway China might send someone there in a few years time just for fun.

 

[Anes]

The thing I don't get about sending people to planets in our solar system is simply this - what's the point? What ground breaking discovery are they going to make by landing some bloke on mars? Is this a patriotic "we got there first" thing? I really don't get it. Even if they find micro organisms there it won't mean jack for another million years.

 

[linkov]

In my view, it's almost ridiculous to send men to the Moon, let alone Mars, in the current regime of debt and wars. I'm more than satisfied with NASA, since they are sending up numerous unmanned probes that are revolutionizing our view of the Sun, planetary science and the universe of stars and galaxies.

Respectfully,
Dotini

You make it sound like there is no benefit from manned space exploration...
There will always be wars, there will always be debt, if not now when?

NASA Budget as % of GDP 2010: 0.6%
US Military Budget as % of GDP 2010: 4.6%

If the choice was between those two things I know where I would rather spend the money...

 

[CodeRedR51]

The thing I don't get about sending people to planets in our solar system is simply this - what's the point? What ground breaking discovery are they going to make by landing some bloke on mars? Is this a patriotic "we got there first" thing? I really don't get it. Even if they find micro organisms there it won't mean jack for another million years.

IMO, sending someone to another planet is no different than when our ancestors were traveling from continent to continent via the ocean. As humans we move forward and explore new "worlds".

 

[OG_Wretch]

The challenge brings on new problems to overcome and what gets discovered can save us or kill us all.
So, what else have we to do with all the free time and extra monies?

 

[Keef]

You make it sound like there is no benefit from manned space exploration...
There will always be wars, there will always be debt, if not now when?

NASA Budget as % of GDP 2010: 0.6%
US Military Budget as % of GDP 2010: 4.6%

If the choice was between those two things I know where I would rather spend the money...

There is great benefit to manned exploration. His point is that there are much more dire needs to be taken care of right now. Like money, which will be worthless paper sooner rather than later if nothing is done about it.

 

[Stevisiov]

I certainly get excited by the prospects of space exploration. There is a big universe and assuming we survive long enough as a species, its almost an inevitability that we will branch out from earth in the long run. Is it important we explore it as soon as we possibly can? Perhaps not, I hope we do though.

 

[DQuaN]

You make it sound like there is no benefit from manned space exploration...
There will always be wars, there will always be debt, if not now when?

NASA Budget as % of GDP 2010: 0.6%
US Military Budget as % of GDP 2010: 4.6%

If the choice was between those two things I know where I would rather spend the money...

It would be interesting if we could find the NASA budget as % of GDP in the 60's.

It does seem shocking that NASA can't do it when they did it in the 60's but I'm pretty sure that they had more money then than they do now, NOT taking into account inflation!

 

[Dotini]

It would be interesting if we could find the NASA budget as % of GDP in the 60's.

It does seem shocking that NASA can't do it when they did it in the 60's but I'm pretty sure that they had more money then than they do now, NOT taking into account inflation!

Sputnik shocked Americans to the core. Kennedy put America on a mission to reach the Moon. America had no debt, and therefore no interest on the debt to pay. The full righteous zeal and checkbook of all Americans was behind the quest. Times are different now.

 

[Submerged]

IMO, sending someone to another planet is no different than when our ancestors were traveling from continent to continent via the ocean. As humans we move forward and explore new "worlds".

Which we should ideally do, so we can create additional possible habitual places to live or learn vastly more about different materials on our solar systems. Its all well and good sending unmanned spacecraft that can automatically do certain things and identify things. But you do not get the same information as you would do in comparison to sending someone over there, with a camera and probes and the like. First hand experience of being in a new place is a useful, powerful information for scientist and also for the layman as well.

With the space exploration programmes, it would also lead toward faster and more efficient aviation transportation (one would hope so).