NASA to Cancel Moon Mission, Constellation, & Future US Manned Spacecraft Program

[Flash]

I can completely understand canceling plans to go to the moon and/or Mars, but canceling the entire Constellation program (as opposed to continuing a limited Aries program for trips to low-earth orbit and the International Space Station) while continuing with plans to end the Shuttle program and relying on the Russians indefinitely instead (regardless of private ventures) seems to be short sighted.

I agree wholeheartedly. But your reasoning is flawed.......

What happens if there is a need for another DoD mission like 10 previous STS DoD only missions including the possibility to do repairs to a DoD or intelligence satellite; what are we gonna do, ask the friendly Russians (or Chinese) to take us there to fix part of our war-fighting capability? I'm sure they'd be thrilled...

The shuttle has not been used for a DoD mission for almost 20 years and have almost certainly have not been a factor in planning our national security satellite planning for quite some time. And from the unclassified details known about the shuttle missions that did carry DoD payloads they are almost entirely unneccessary anyways. If something goes wrong, well, we are SOL, which is really not much different than we are now when something goes wrong. The value of the shuttle when it comes to that is very minimal, period.

Some of the spacecraft referenced to 'replace' the shuttle and Orion include the SpaceX Dragon and Orbital Sciences Corporation's Cygnus.

 

[Calculon]

I can completely understand canceling plans to go to the moon and/or Mars, but canceling the entire Constellation program (as opposed to continuing a limited Aries program for trips to low-earth orbit and the International Space Station) while continuing with plans to end the Shuttle program and relying on the Russians indefinitely instead (regardless of private ventures) seems to be short sighted.

It's actually the other way around from what I've seen.

Cancelling NASA's role of ferrying junk to LEO is fine - other companies can handle it now, and for cheap. In fact, most satellites and stuff are already being ferried up that way. NASA should, however, be the one driving Moon/Mars/beyond missions that private corporations may not have the resources/technology/will to go on.

So if this is the route they go on, then it certainly makes sense. A lot of NASA engineers were already talking about getting rid of being the one's doing the actual design/build of the vehicles as early as the 80's

 

[FlyingOnFumes]

It's actually the other way around from what I've seen.

Cancelling NASA's role of ferrying junk to LEO is fine - other companies can handle it now, and for cheap. In fact, most satellites and stuff are already being ferried up that way. NASA should, however, be the one driving Moon/Mars/beyond missions that private corporations may not have the resources/technology/will to go on.

So if this is the route they go on, then it certainly makes sense. A lot of NASA engineers were already talking about getting rid of being the one's doing the actual design/build of the vehicles as early as the 80's

My issue has never been about CANx'ing NASA's role of ferrying "junk" to LEO.. privatization of much of that (which if I think it already has been done for quite a while) with competition among private industry is a good thing. My issue is NASA completely giving up it's own manned spacecraft program, especially without a private replacement and that too one that NASA can purchase for NASA use.

My analogy is along of the lines of privatization of aerospace in national defense (i.e comparing it to DoD; no longer suggesting NASA still has (or ever did have) a national defense role). While the government should not be the sole owner, operator, and maintainer of aircraft; I think we'd all agree that the military should maintain its own fleet of military aircraft (even if procured from the private sector as it ultimately is even with NASA manned launch vehicles) and not completely privatize all of aviation in the U.S. to include those in the military. Maybe the analogy is a stretch, but is what i'm thinking.

 

[navy09]

FoF- without any firsthand knowledge, I think you're crediting NASA- in its current form- with a much bigger role in national defense than it really has. As MIDNJAC pointed out, I'm sure the effects of this have already been pondered by people in the know.

If you want to be an interstellar warrior, go SWO and get orders to a Ballistic Missile Defense cruiser or destroyer :icon_rage

 

[Calculon]

My issue has never been about CANx'ing NASA's role of ferrying "junk" to LEO.. privatization of much of that (which if I think it already has been done for quite a while) with competition among private industry is a good thing. My issue is NASA completely giving up it's own manned spacecraft program, especially without a private replacement and that too one that NASA can purchase for NASA use..

Well it remains to be seen whether that's exactly what happens. I do agree with you that I don't want NASA giving up manned programs in favor of essentially private contractors.

My personal belief has always been that NASA needs to be slimmed down, but should be in charge of higher risk/cost/long distance missions that private corporations wouldn't take on, and if these cuts are done correctly, NASA can re-focus on what it needs to do, rather than be all over the place.

 

[OscarMyers]

We definatily have to be on the look out now. Iran is launching turtles, rats and worms into space. Before you know it theyre going to have a better manned space program then us.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/02/03/iran.space.satellites/index.html?hpt=T2

 

[yak52driver]

http://portal.tds.net/news/read.php...ass&action=3&lang=en&_LT=HOME_USNWC00L3_UNEWS

Looks like an initial test of the crew escape rocket for Orion was successful. It will be interesting to see if it ever gets used...

 

[Kaman]

Curtailment and/or cancellation of future manned space missions is short-sighted and a mistake that will take decades to rectify. The industrial base will erode, corporate knowledge and a pool of trained and mission-ready astronauts will become non-existent in less than a generation. No disagreement that we need to exercise fiscal restraint in further spending, but this is "smart-money" compared to all the complete waste of taxpayer dollars on the menu of government entitlement programs that are either in force or in the pipeline. Exploration is an absolute must, colonization of space is a must and developing space-based weapon systems are a must for our survival as a species nevermind a nation.

 

[Fog]

We are on the fast-rack to 2nd Rank nation status. Our mideast military endeavors under G.W. Bush got us into a precarious position financially, and now the Great One is doing Great Society II through totally deficit spending. If re-elected, God knows what our military & space capabilities will be in 10 years. JMHO.

 

[mmx1]

2nd to who?

 

[Fog]

2nd to who?

China, for one.

 

[HercDriver]

Curtailment and/or cancellation of future manned space missions is short-sighted and a mistake that will take decades to rectify. The industrial base will erode, corporate knowledge and a pool of trained and mission-ready astronauts will become non-existent in less than a generation. No disagreement that we need to exercise fiscal restraint in further spending, but this is "smart-money" compared to all the complete waste of taxpayer dollars on the menu of government entitlement programs that are either in force or in the pipeline. Exploration is an absolute must, colonization of space is a must and developing space-based weapon systems are a must for our survival as a species nevermind a nation.

Do you mind explaining what this means? Are space-based weapon systems a must for our "survival as a species" in case we are attacked by Klingons or those guys from Independence Day?

 

[HercDriver]

We are on the fast-rack to 2nd Rank nation status. Our mideast military endeavors under G.W. Bush got us into a precarious position financially, and now the Great One is doing Great Society II through totally deficit spending. If re-elected, God knows what our military & space capabilities will be in 10 years. JMHO.

Wayne Gretzky is doing Great Society II?


You complain of deficit spending, but in the next sentence you have a problem with cutting spending. Looks like you want to have it both ways.

 

[JollyGood]

Do you mind explaining what this means? Are space-based weapon systems a must for our "survival as a species" in case we are attacked by Klingons or those guys from Independence Day?

I assume he is talking about a major impact event. (i.e. asteroid or comet)

Don't worry, I will get Bruce Willis on the phone ASAP and make sure he gets in touch with Billy Bob Thornton.

 

[Fog]

Wayne Gretzky is doing Great Society II?


You complain of deficit spending, but in the next sentence you have a problem with cutting spending. Looks like you want to have it both ways.

GSII involves more deficit spending than anyone ever imagined possible for purposes never considered likely 5 years ago. Yes, military & space spending will fall, but aggregate spending is rising 15%+ per year. Don't worry, the USCG will never be able to afford replacing your Herc w/ a French a/c. Autre fois, JMHO.