ERnie: "...NASA thinking is what led us to having to rely on a *30* year-old space shuttle for human space transport." Seems to me the shuttle was quite successful. Anyway, the successor was supposed to be the Ares rocket ( mega-lifter ), and that is getting shelved, at least if the WH gets its way. That will leave the USA with No way to get astronauts or goodies to the space station. I like the admin's emphasis on seeking to incentivize commercial space vehicles. The proposal is to spend $ 1 billion per year for that program. But, as good an idea as that is, we live in a competitive world. The Russians are still very much in the Space game, the Chinese are developing their own program, India and Japan are coming along behind them, and there also is the European space agency. Even the Iranians are involved even if, concerning them, they are impossibly far behind at this time. More to the point, Earth is a planet, and it exists in the solar system. I'm not convinced that 64 million BC is the best way to think about such issues but, especially since Shoemaker-Levy, it seems to be one good way to conceive things. Not to count the fact that the existence of water on the Moon has been confirmed and that opens up all kind of possibilities. Orbital commercial space transport simply cannot do what NASA has been doing. and ought to do in the future. Especially not when so much is spent on the finance sector --for a dysfunctional and sometimes grossly immoral "product," while NASA's manned program costs so little in comparison. IMHO science and technology are FAR more valuable investments than sinking hundreds of billions into firms like Morgan -Stanley or AIG. That is, we seem to now have a "flat Earth" WH. This is embarrassing considering that Bush, Jr, a dunce by objective standards of the presidency, had a more enlightened vision for Space development. Billy ============================= In a message dated 2/28/2010 2:24:48 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
Hi Billy, On Feb 28, 2010, at 1:37 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: We have seen what NASA can do. Hubble. Spitzer. The Mars rovers ( still operational several years after their 3 month expiration dates. All unmanned missions, which last I checked were unaffected. An international space station which is fully functional with much promise for the future. Built largely by the Russians, and currently eight years behind schedule: _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station) Your point about NASA competence being what, exactly? The next logical step is colonization of the Moon and eventual human flight to Mars. That may well be true. But NASA thinking is what led us to having to rely on a *30* year-old space shuttle for human space transport. Look, NASA did a fantastic job on the moon, and does a fantastic job on unmanned space flight. But human space travel at NASA is a mess, which is wh I agree Bush's vision was a great one, and I am sad that it was lost. But it is a mitigated disaster. When, I dunno, President Jenna Bush take's up her father's legacy in 2020, it may well be wise for her to adopt a more lean/Silicon Valley approach vs. the military-industrial megalith of the current NASA. -- Ernie P. _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radic alcentrism.com/
_______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
