PDA

View Full Version : Should NASA Overhaul Its Vision?



Fraser
2008-Jan-22, 03:40 PM
Is the moon really “so yesterday?” An article in the Jan. 18 issue of Aviation Week and Space Technology reported that a group influential people in the space community will meet in early February to discuss alternatives to NASA’s current Vision for Space Exploration of returning to the moon to prepare for future missions [...]

More... (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/universetoday/pYdq/~3/221036694/)

JustAFriend
2008-Jan-22, 11:15 PM
..well it's one way of giving themselves another 5 or 10 years to get something flying again after the Shuttle is retired (that's assuming that the next administration doesn't gut the budgets even further.)

My take on it is: they made a HUGE mistake by insisting that the space program be totally civilian. Turn it over to the military (the pilots are all Air Force test pilots anyway) and give them a directive to get something done by a certain date. Let them ferry the civilian scientists out to the exploratory bases.

The '50s-60s sci-fi movies and TV shows had it right....

Grand_Lunar
2008-Jan-24, 03:31 AM
I say that the moon still should be a target. The moon can be an important place for humanity's role in space.

Then, let's go further, to asteroids. And from there, the rest of our solar system.

Noclevername
2008-Jan-24, 03:05 PM
Then, let's go further, to asteroids. And from there, the rest of our solar system.

The asteroids need not be considered "further", some of the Near Earth Asteroids can be reached with less delta-v than a Moon landing.

avillarrealpouw
2008-Jan-24, 03:35 PM
The huge mistake of NASA was the Space Shuttle.

Although it seemed a laudable idea at the time, halfway through the development phase it was clear that the disposable rocket is cheaper than the reusable shuttle by a factor of at least 4.

Furthermore, NASA's plan to use the Shuttle for everything meant that human lives had to be risked just to haul cargo back and forth.

The same funds should have been used to develop a propulsion system that makes interplanetary exploration affordable. Or, at least, keep the manned missions limited to those where people have an invaluable advantage.

Remember, military administration made the billion dollar aircraft carriers swell into four billion dollar carriers with no measurable advantage to explain the overspending. Changing from one monopoly to another is not a good idea and usually a very expensive way to stay in the same place.

Noclevername
2008-Jan-24, 07:40 PM
The huge mistake of NASA was the Space Shuttle.

Although it seemed a laudable idea at the time, halfway through the development phase it was clear that the disposable rocket is cheaper than the reusable shuttle by a factor of at least 4.

Furthermore, NASA's plan to use the Shuttle for everything meant that human lives had to be risked just to haul cargo back and forth.

The same funds should have been used to develop a propulsion system that makes interplanetary exploration affordable. Or, at least, keep the manned missions limited to those where people have an invaluable advantage.



Hear, hear. But the politicians wanted a cool-looking shiny new toy that they could point to as using the "latest and greatest" technology, over those dull boosters the Russkies used.