NASA changes direction

[admin]

What do you think? Is it a good idea to cancel the Constellation program and hand over much of the job of getting humans and payloads into space to private companies? Is the commercial space industry up to the task? Will it be less expensive, safer, more innovative?

This is a little long, but here is a three part program on the issue:

[youtube]ub7lorrEfOw[/youtube]

[youtube]0zw4Bx--vhI[/youtube]

[youtube]QulJ6oYJZvA[/youtube]

[HairyBuddah]

I've gotta admit I am really conflicted about this one. Particularly now that we have found water on the moon in apparently usable quantities I really want to see a moon colony. One of the reasons I am not terribly worried about CO2 production and global warming is my belief that we will move most heavy manufacturing out into space.

On the one hand I see this as a delay for that goal. On the other hand I don't think we are ready for large scale space colonization. I think we really need to get an effective AI to complete construction of habitats and factories. People are just too fragile in space, so machines will have to do the heavy lifting.

It has long been my feeling that NASA is not doing a very good job. The design of the shuttle was always a joke. Tiles? Are you kidding? And now they are going back to spam in a can.

The other day a NASA guy was on one of our local radio stations. I called in and asked him why they aren't collecting that Shuttle external tanks around the ISS for later use. They are made up of a lot of metal, and are a pre-built airtight cylinder that could be used for habitat space. His answer? "Uh, we were not tasked with that mission." What? You're kidding, right? You are the guys who decided on the taskings. So I pressed him and asked if it would be a good idea to keep the tanks up there as a resource rather than doing all the work of lifting them into orbit, only to let them tumble into the atmo at the last minute. Again he didn't talk about the concept, he just said it wasn't part of "mission parameters." We could already have a space hotel for rich tourists.

So I am a big fan of space exploration. NASA? Not so much.

On the other hand I am not sure if there is enough money out there in private hands to really develop space. I look at Eisenhower and the interstate system. That was a great idea that could only have been done by government. It was both a vital military road network as well as a huge boon to commerce. Because the entire US was settled it probably required government's ability to use eminent domain to get the rights of way. The 50s were a different time from the 1800's when private companies were able to build the rail roads.

I don't know the math well enough to know if space exploration will require an equivalent amount of risk capital as did the rails back then. Low Earth Orbit stuff is a LOT cheaper than completely leaving the earth's gravity well and then having to deal with some other gravity well.

So I guess I am philosophically glad that government is getting the heck out of the way, but I am concerned that development will not happen as quickly as I would like, and am pissed off at the way the government didn't live up to a moon landing commitment it had already made.

Hairy

[KenDennis]

It is time for the egg to hatch and get off this rock into our true home, space. Every time NASA has a good plan for exploration, political interests and military priorities mess it up. Not spending resources on getting into space dooms humanity. Government cannot make space travel and commerce practical and affordable. Business will have to eventually take over this role. The only question is when.