Slashdot Mirror
The Faceless Astronauts
jmott wrote to us with an article from USA Today that talks about the decline of popularity/fame of today's astronauts, compared to the days of Buzz, Shepard and others. It's not surprising that NASA is having fiscal problems when space travel has become not something of marvel, but of everyday import.
Deep see diving is a risky profession too, but when was the last ticker tape parade for a diver you remember seeing?
Being an astronaut is reward in itself, if you ask me. Someone where I work keeled over with a heart attack last year but, as much as he will be missed, I don't think anyone wants to erect a statue for him.
I am not saying that I am anti-astronauts, or anti space or science. What I am saying is respect somebody for what they do, not who they are.
There is a cult of personality which affects our societies now in very negative ways. We want to know everything: Names, schools, favourite foods, underwear preferences. Everything. Does it really matter? Does it hell. Can you relate to somebody better because he wears the same sunglasses as you? If you can, stop and take a good long look at who YOU are.
The extremely controversial discussion website adequacy.org has a very interesting and controversial remedy for this. An interesting article, available here, goes into depth on the subject of how we select NASA astronauts and what we can do to make it better (NOTE:Article is controversial)
I think that NASA depends very much on public image; we must select not only in terms of professionalism, but character too. Michael Foales had it; people like John Blaha and other nameless astro's do not. In this age of instant democracy and bread and circuses, charisma of your main representatives is very important.
--
--
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
If you recall Apollo 13, that was kind of the prevailing attitude among the American public before the oxygen tank explosion that aborted the mission and placed the astronauts' lives in jeopardy. (NASA guy's line: "The networks say we make going to the moon seem about as exciting as a trip to Pittsburgh.")
I don't care what anyone says, though, there's nothing "routine" about going into space. Not yet, anyway. Some of us would love to see the day it does become routine...that day will come, maybe not in our lifetimes, but one day, because the human race needs to get off this rock!
Yes, I'm a fan of space travel. I've got a signed picture of Buzz Aldrin hanging on the wall of my computer room. These days, I generally pay attention to the exploits of one astronaut in particular, the one I and some of my relatives refer to as "Cousin Kenny," Kenneth Bowersox. (No, he's not a close relative, but he's probably related somehow.) He's flown four missions (including the Hubble repair missions, the first of which was a "must win" for NASA; that speaks volumes about his capabilities), and is due to command an ISS expedition at some point. (He was backup commander for the first ISS crew.) He's also noted for his appearances on Home Improvement, where Tim Allen made fun of his last name (which I didn't take too personally :-) ).
God knows, if I had the kind of money Dennis Tito gave the Russians, I couldn't think of anything better to spend it on than going up myself. My only problem is that, at 6'3", I'm too tall to fit in a Soyuz...
Eric
--
Be who you are...and be it in style!
NASA needs more firsts... Every school child in America knew (knows?) that Sally Ride was the first woman astronaut. How about promoting an all-woman mission? Maybe they could hook up with the entertainment industry and have the WWF sponsor a "No Holds Barred, No gravity" tag-team grudge match in space. I guarantee that would get some NASA attention (although it might be the wrong kind). Send up the first commedian in space... or send up Homer Simpson (wait, that's already been done. Never mind. :) )
I think Homer Simpson sums this up really well. DOH!
In the years up to the Lunar missions, NASA worked with the general public. You know, the unwashed masses. Yeah, those people. It was cheaper and more effective to distribute large, complicated tasks over a large number of processors -- oops, people, such as mapping the lunar surface, than it was to attempt the entire job centrally.
In short, not only did NASA invent the Beowulf Cluster, they demonstrated it, as implemented over society. Translated: They got people involved.
THAT is the crux of the issue, IMHO. Nobody's involved in NASA-type stuff, any more. Nobody there cares. Even NASA Select is no better. The "Public Face" of NASA is more interested in stale interviews and a nausiating channel ID, than Lenoid Meteors or Solar Eclipses.
Sorry, but if NASA can't do better than a bunch of third-graders, then they need to be sent back to the third grade.
"But rocket science is complicated!" Tell that to the Japanese. They're doing what I've been regularly predicting here. They're working together, amateurs and professionals in one gigantic think-tank. And from the Slashdot feature on the rockets they're building, you don't need a crystall ball or tea-leaves to see that approaches like this will kill NASA completely.
Which is a shame, as NASA's greatest triumphs have come from those very same approaches and philosophies.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Why should NASA's scientists get any more recognition than other scientists. There is nothing intrinsically valuable about space.
Its the fact that we simply dont know. The people that sail across the Atlantic every year are sailing on a mass that we -know- a lot about. Certinly not everything, but enough. Its the media that is making us 'forget' about space travel. Just like the people who only complain when something goes wrong, the media will only make us glued to our sets when something goes wrong, or something new happens. The difference between the Atlantic and space is that we simply dont know about space. Everything is pretty much different from the last time we did it.
_14k4 slashdot@poorheart.com www.poorheart.com
They fly stunts like the John Glenn mission, and waste money (4.8 BILLION overbudget) on the Great White Elephant in the sky. NASA HQ has essentially no control over JSC (Johnson, in Texas), nor exercises good cost-controls over contracters. They have been flying in circles around the Earth for 20 years, while claiming to be "out on the frontier, exploring". Yeah, they have made space boring and largely irrelevant for most people.
o rb ital_go.htm
The real development in and of space is starting to happen, and it's being done privately. Companies like SpaceDev and Space Imaging are building and flying completely private missions, for wicked cheap, and doing it all with a business plan for profit. Also, organizations like the Planetary Society are doing incredible work, as they always have, with no government money.
The Planetary Society, today, announced that the Solar Sail project is a go for test launch next week:
http://www.planetary.org/html/society/press/sub
This is completely private (on the American side), damn good research, and has the potential to considerably change the costs of deep space missions. Far moreso than NA$A launching another overpriced module for an overpriced, underpowered, research-less station.
Veriditas Ad Astra!
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
"Nobody knows who astronauts are because they don't do anything groundbreaking anymore. It's been done.
Get over it."
They don't do stuff that the public can see as being groundbreaking. In between giant leaps there are periods of incremental, cumulative goundbreakings that aren't particularly glamourous or able to capture the public's fleeting attention, but that set the stage for the next giant leap.
Or we could have another big fatal disaster; that'd garner some name recognition factor, but it's not a method I'd recommend.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
There is nothing intrinsically valuable about space.
Hmm.. It's only where all the resources are, and just about everything that's not on this tiny planet of ours..
It's just about the most valuable place there is
I do agree with the sentiment that today's astronauts aren't as ground breaking as their forerunners tho.
Malk
Complacency over the space program is nothing new. Back in 1986, successful shuttle launches had become so commonplace that the major networks no longer covered them live. CNN was the only channel still giving launches live TV coverage, and as a consequence scooped their competition when STS-51L went tragically wrong and we lost the Challenger and her crew. Fifteen years later we're in the midst of one of the busiest years ever for shuttle launches... and how many of you know that we successfully launched Atlantis early this morning?
--Jim
This is the problem with the ISS: it's not an exciting mission, and it only registers on the public radar screen as a waste of taxpayer money. Even if it produces plenty of valuable science, it has nowhere near the PR value of, say, live video from Titan or a Mars landing. It's common sense, really: it's much easier to convince people when you have pretty pictures (Hubble, Mars lander) and human interest (manned Moon missions as a risky race with the USSR with personality conflicts and the rest) on your side.
Planning missions based solely on scientific merit may sound like a good idea, but you need the eye candy and the soap operas to keep up public support and get public money. NASA can ignore this if they like, but they do so at their peril.
What have today's astronauts done? Only strapped themselves into a huge, barely-controlled bomb and blasted themselves off the freakin planet. Just because somebody did it before doesn't make it any less crazy or remarkable
How is this different from what airline pilots do? It's not. The only difference is "space" has a kind of mystique that appeals to a certain demographic. Other people feel the same way about the ocean.
Let's just agree that it's really, really hard.
Lots of things are really, really hard. But we don't turn the people who do them into heroes.
And finally: if you really want people to sit up and take notice, you have to do something Impossible
People don't care about things just because they are complicated and dangerous.
What have the astronauts done to earn fame comparable to their forerunners? Nothing.
How many people sail across the Atlantic every year? Should we give them all the same recognition that Columbus gets?
Of course not. They do routine work. Just like these astronauts. Why should NASA's scientists get any more recognition than other scientists. There is nothing intrinsically valuable about space.
You forgot: One with glaring personal hygiene problems.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Let's send Britney Spears and Mandy Moore to the ISS, and let them float around in their usual attire.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
It's a simple fact that 'astronauts' aren't special anymore. Their just workers like any other, and I don't see why they should be treated any differently.
NASA has been pushing the image of astronauts as being 'special' or 'different' for so long they can't comprehend that they aren't 'special' or 'different'. The recent 'vacation' of a civilian (forgot his name, seems he's fallen into obscurity) the Russians took up to the space station was opposed by NASA because they want to keep upholding the idea that astronauts are 'special' or 'different' despite that basically anybody who passes the physical is able to go into space. Their nothing more than glorified mechanics.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
How perfect of USA Today to think that we've forgotten the astronauts just because their writers aren't paying attention.
I guess $20M doesn't buy much more than the same 15 minutes anything else gets you - yeah, Dennis Tito counts as a famous astronaut.
But spend a little time poking around SpaceFacts. Scan any one of the comprehensive lists of space people and see just how few names have ever been well-known.
Fame is the exception, as usual. USA Today forgot that. As usual...
Last I checked, Bush's plan relied almost completely upon building a battlestar Galactica type ship up in orbit, something that's also never been done.
Okay, I've been a huge fan of space for years. I've got a plastic space shuttle that was one of my more cherished toys when I was 3 (22 years ago). I've read many books about the Apollo landings, seen several movies, and generally dug the whole experience. But the fact of the matter is, with a few notable exceptions (Mars Pathfinder) NASA has been totally boring.
We're not exploring, we're taking our space truck up into outer space and performing half-assed experiements. What's the current big project? Build a space station! How half-assed is that? Damnit, all we're doing is trucking and construction. Do you see people lining up to watch truckers and construction workers on earth? What makes you think it would be different in space?
If NASA wants to capture America's atention again then F'N *DO* something. Explore mars! Look for new life! Send people! Probes are neat, but they just don't have the same impact as "One small step for a man".
Check out The Mars Society for more information. Better yet, read A case for Mars by Robert Zubrin to see how it could be done for 1/10th of what those bean-counters told Bush.
Damnit, all we're doing is trucking and construction. Do you see people lining up to watch truckers and construction workers on earth?
1977 - Smokey and the Bandit
1978 - Convoy, B.J. and the Bear
1983 - Truck Stop Women (financed by future Sen. Phil Gramm)
Ahhh, those were the days, good buddy!
Since the USA has so many astronauts, I can see the perception would be different there. But here in Canada, since we've had so few, those who have gone up are fairly well known.
(A/C quoted in case he doesn't get modded up)
I think I have it the right way round. I respect Mike Tyson because he is a good boxer, but I don't respect him as a human being because of his questionnable moral standards.
As I don't worship at the altar of celebrity, there is no need for me to try to pretend to like him. Simply forget about him.
When he was world champion he was famous. Afterwards, if he behaves badly then cut off his air supply: publicity.
If he uses his former glory to justify something, then that is the time to bring up his misbehaviour.
It's not like they are taking any risks nowadays, at least not like in the days of old.
If you want to be an astronaut, do it because you want to go to space, not to appear on the cover of Time magazine, and milk it for the rest of your life on chat shows.
January 2000, I'm speaking with a couple of people I know. One of these people is an astronaut on STS-101. The two non-astronauts in the conversation (myself and Jim) were commenting on how incredible it was, and how exciting it must be. Our Austronaut friend responded with "It's just my job. Sure the launch is exciting, but the rest of it is just my job, It's not a big deal"
I was floored. "Just my job"?? I didn't know what to say. If the astronauts aren't excited about their job, I think they should be.
"We are not tolerant people. We prefer drastically effective solutions"
Who is this "noone" fellow and why do you care what he remembers or forgets? Is he related to the "Right" brothers? I don't know them either.
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=noo ne
Perhaps you meant "no one"?
This is merely my superficial impression, but whenever I watch the NASA feed on TV, I don't get any sense that I'm watching The Right Stuff. Instead, what it looks like are a bunch of corporate middle managers on a packaged junket. Plus, there's too much pomp and circumstance and not enough real progress going on: at every mission launch, NASA has a new sound bite slogan describing the mission in 10 words or less; each "morning" the astronauts are awakened by some special song chosen for some dumb reason. That's the kind of crap that NASA makes available to the public, while at the same time it seems they've been less than forthcoming about difficulties with the ISS.
Yeah, like "reality" television.
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
The other factor which has resulted in a decline in fame is that there are more of them. It's easy for 1 person of 7 to be famous. It's less easy when it's 1 person out of 200 or so.
32 years ago next Monday, Apollo 11 lifted off. Back then, nobody would ever have believed that after only 3-1/2 years and six lunar landings, we would scrap the whole thing.
In 1970, I truly believed that going into space was something that I would be able to do in my lifetime. I now know that I'll never leave our gravity well.
Experiments on the effects of zero gravity on bacteria doesn't really capture the imagination of the public. Everything they are doing has been done before, even probes to other planets. Just look at the reaction to rumours about manned missions to Mars and you can see what will rekindle interest in space travel. It was trying to land people on the Moon that originally fired our collective imagination. When NASA starts sending people (not probes) to other planets, then they will regain their fame (and with it their budget...)
In the days of Apollo it meant something to achieve fame, the Beatles & the Stones were huge and there was no such thing as a C list. These days the "celebrity" list runs down to Z. Why show an astronaut when you can show some 17 year old "singer" in a short dress ?
Well come to mediocrity by TV.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
I think that NASA and the media has stoped promoting the space program. When we were flooded with info about the Mars lander we were all glued to our TV's but when was the last time you heard anything about the normal space program besides how much some satelite or piece of the ISS (aplha) cost? That is why dont know anyone by name. Americans have an attention span of about 2 minutes. If we are not reminded we will easily forget.
"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people in the world?"
Back in the days of the space race, cosmonauts were not displayed as celebrities until after they had made their first flight. Nobody even knew their names until they were pretty much sitting on the launch pad.
----
Striving to put right what once went wrong, and hoping each time that his next leap, will be the leap ho
Unfortunately, they haven't really done anything since then to grab the public's interest, except for blowing up a school teacher. There's a space station, but that's less interesting than, say, a moon colony, or a manned flight to mars, or what have you.
NASA has gotten boring, and boring things seldom get public support. See Also: Department of Agriculture.
Got Rhinos?
Orville and Wilbur WRIGHT were the first men to get aloft via mechanically powered flight.
A rock is not an airplane because it follows a ballistic trajectory. Unless gravity is significanly less at kitty hawk, the wright brothers plane did not follow a ballistic trajectory. Take a model airplane and throw it into the air, then you have a glider. Its unpowered, and all of its velocity is due to your arm. It does not behave like a rock, it behaves like an unpowered airplane. It can stay in the air only as long as its initial velocity holds out, or until it can catch a themal. If you take a glider, and you put an engine on it such that it is now powered, and capable of remaining in the air longer than any initial velocity imparted to it, you have an airplane. for comparison, aircraft carriers launch their planes with a catapult, does this mean they arent airplanes? no. An airplane is defined by being able to remain in the air when an unpowered glider or kite would be unable to. The wright brothers satisfy this. By 1905 their flyer 3 had traveled almost 30 miles in a single flight. You can make the case that the wrights didnt have the first fully powered takeoff and landing of an airplane, ill give you that, but the principle of the airplane was theirs, powered takeoff is just an evolution.
Columbia is the oldest shuttle in the fleet and recently underwent a major overhaul to make the cockpit more modern and reduce weight.
Oddly enough, it looks as though Japan is pushing pretty hard with the lower-cost systems. It appears things like the XPrize may get the industry moving again, but not necessarily in the hands of NASA.
In some ways, Voyager is doing more interesting things than ISS as it's nearing the edge of the Sun's influence. Then it really enters the galaxy as a whole and "sees" new things.
ISS is a great undertaking, and the multinational cooperation is truly outstanding, but it's more of a political project at this point. It's becoming evident that the US people via Congress aren't going to foot the bill for this stuff any more, and that other groups like the Planetary Society, and other countries will have to get more into the area of space exploration to recapture the pioneering spirit. NASA is between a rock and a hard place with money and overhead. A new approach is needed.
Heck, Buzz, Armstrong and the like were kind of daredevils. Apollo 1 killed 3. Challenger killed 7. But now, the safety record of NASA is improving to the point where people mistakenly believe it's safe. Familiarity breeds contempt.
I'm all for space exploration. But NASA can't be the only ones doing it.
They meant that they wanted the launch vehicles to be so safe that successful launches were like a 747 taking off (snore). Of course, these were guys (98%) who grew up driving to the local airport for Sunday picnics so they could watch the newfangled jets launch.
What they missed was that "space - the final frontier" was much more "fund-worthy (TM, (R),(C))" than "space - where we go to grow wierd new crystals that even a NewAger won't love".
-remembered in the names of cities and even
-continents all over the western hemisphere, but
-do you know the name of any given modern
-ship captain?
How about Joseph Hazelwood?
I sure hope noone forgot him!
Why is it so hot? Where am I going? What am I doing in this handbasket?
You're right about the lack of exciting advancement in space, but you have to admit the ISS project really is a necessary step for any new progress. I'm fairly sure any attempts at a manned mission to Mars would require either a vessel constructed in space or a vessel that refuels/refits in space. Sometimes periods of boredom are required for development, whether you lose tv ratings or not.
When was the last time you were wildly excited about debugging? heh.
Ice Cream has no bones.
....Hold on....what was I going to say?
--
The idea that space can be some utopia just needs to end. We need to realize that money can be made, and start doing it.
I demand a million helicopters and a DOLLAR!
The reason astronauts aren't famous anymore is that it isn't tabloid news, which is all that's reported today in the mainstream media.
For example, when Dennis Tito went up, the media could spin headlines like, "NASA objects to presence of untrained moron tourist", or "Russia finds a way not to tax it's people for spaceflight", or "Bitter feud between Russia and NASA hits orbit". It was like a Jerry Springer show.
So, NASA needs things like:
- Wrestling/Jesse Ventura in Space
- Elderly Tourists with Cameras
- Survivor (one astronaut voted out the airlock each week)
- Redneck-type controversy.
- William Shatner: Mission Commander.
That'll get the media, and therefore the American people, interested in space again!
It was not so long ago that EVERY shuttle Launch was news. I remember getting up at insane hours of the morning when I was younger so I could watch the launch. I still would if they ever showed them. Seems like it was pretty much after the Challenger Blew up that they stopped showing the launches. I want them back on the air personally, it would do excellent things for Nasa's Image and public awareness. We NEED to explore space, and we need the $$ to do it. OUT of sight out of mind is whats happening to NASA. Our Planet is getting, more polluted, and more crowded as the minutes count, we are running out of resources. The answers to these problems are beyond the reaches of Earth's Gravity. Don't even go down the road, of conservation, recycling, social reform, less births, ETC. Wake the hell up people its not gonna happen. If anything has been proven over the history of the human race its that we consume, and never ever look back its in our nature. We need to spead out, and frankly this little rock is to damn small for us now.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
What can we geeks do to help the space program? Why, we can be geeky and talk it up to people that normally don't think about space. NASA just isn't hyping space up like they used to, and even though you're supposed to see the ISS as a bright object in the sky, people forget because that's about the time they'e running home from work and have bigger things on their minds. It's up to us to bring it up...the ISS isn't going to talk itself up at the water cooler. If people don't know that anything important is going on up on that station or anywhere else in space, then citizens are going to go for those budget cuts and NASA will go nowhere. Let's not repeat the post-Apollo-pre-shuttle days by sitting on the side and watching it go by. Will the next few Mars rovers be the spectacle of the first, or will people treat it as a bad sequel and groan? Or will people just hear about another accident in space on the way to Mars and roll their eyes?
Without something life-changing happening in space, I'm afraid those people across the world (the I in ISS, folks!) will forget about space if we don't remind them. With the Middle East on the verge of causing World War III and such other perils, people honestly don't have time to think about this until something like an explosion or astronauts sodomizing each other makes a newsbite.
I happen to subscribe to the Space.com newsletters, and without them, I would not have remembered that the shuttle Atlantis took off today to the ISS to attach the Joint Airlock module. Who else knew what the astronauts on the ISS did yesterday?
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Just like some of us systems administrators are now the janitors of the Internet and other networks, so will astronauts become the janitors of satellites and other space objects, going around playing with hoses like DeNiro in Brazil. Some might be the real workers of space, in labs to create new drugs and new "perfect" objects in the weightlessness of space, but most will just be support people there to clean the tanks, burn the trash, prepare the foods, and ferry people up and down. But, boy, will that view be great to see.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
NASA will send a blue collar slob into space in the next ten years. I fear the accuracy of simpsons writers.
From the 1950s through the early 1970s, money was no object to space. The US was in a cold war with the USSR, and space became a primary competion site. No price was too high, as long as results happened. Then the oil embargo happened and funds for more moon trips dried up.
NASA transfered its focus to spacestation building, starting with Skylab, to catch up to the Soviets again. It launched Skylab on the cheap, using some leftover Apollo hardware and started development on the shuttle for building space stations. The embargo was over and things were picking up speed for Reagan's Starwars program, complete with a REALLY BIG space station Freedom.
In the 1980s, the economy tripped up a bit. Congress had a harder time justifying the HUGE expenses that government agencies were eating up. Then the Challenger blew up and people started to wonder if it was worth it. Shuttle flights were put on hold for a few years, the iron curtain started to fall with the Berlin wall, the Soviets bankrupt their economy trying to copy the US space shuttle, and space station Freedom couldn't be launched while the shuttle was grounded.
NASA's budget was cut, since it didn't seem to be doing much any more, and it was no longer a sacred cow. Now NASA is stuck in a bit of a conundrum. It can't do anything exciting, because its budget keeps getting cut (while inflation keeps driving costs higher). If it doesn't do anything exciting, people don't pay as much attention (they were supposed to be vacationing on the moon by now! Why get excited by some specialist going in orbit, again?) If a congressperson's constituents aren't letting him know that they want space, they won't protect its budget. Since only a few congressmen have districts with significant numbers of space-jobs, (who only care about keeping those jobs), how can NASA's budget grow?
Every president since Bush I has cut NASA's budget. I think it was > $25 Billion under Bush I, ~$17 Billion under Clinton, and now it is $14 Billion under Bush II. (BTW, each has told NASA that they will get more money from the next president). How is NASA supposed to plan a realistic trip to _anywhere_ with that kind of budget?
Now, Bush is insisting the the economy is going down again and the government needs to give money back to taxpayers. (begin_sarcasm) Since it has been so long since NASA did anything memorable, why not cut some of their budget? They're not making good use of it. (end_sarcasm)
Now it actually looks like some hope, with Russion thinking about relaunching Buran and both Japan and China ramping up their space programs. Not that I'm not patriotic, but Japan did more to make the Allies win WWII by slapping the US in the face at Pearl harbor than could have been done almost any other way. A good slap in the face by other countries in this area could again wake the sleeping giant.
I'll get off my stump now.
science is a religion
You're wrong about there being a requirement of space construction or refueling in space. READ the book and you'll see that it's relatively easy to do without all that bs. You launch a rocket that refuels on Mars using in-situ material and follow it with a crew 2 years later in another vessel that travels straight there. (It takes *less* energy to reach Mars than Luna!
When was the last time you heard about an inanimate carbon rod? It's time we stand up and recognize all the valuable work inanimate carbon rods have contributed to our space program. These nameless heros deserve parades and medals. They deserve to be recognized! Show your support for the inanimate carbon rods!
It would be one thing if NASA PAO would release anything of worth. But no, they have to block a mess of stuff that's interesting and even useful to know if you're halfway interested in space. Heck, I've been a little busy this last week, and I didn't even realize NASA was launching another ISS mission until last night--and I work with NASA.
NASA PAO is one of the most closeted groups. They let out only what they want you to know...
-- Geof F. Morris
I can only hope that the government of China, the EU, Japan or some other country will one day announce that they will start working on a manned mission to Mars. If that were to happen I'm sure the US government and NASA would probably jump to attention and get to work doing the same thing. As the article mentions, the Bush Administration has basically cut funding to the extent that a manned mission would not be possible. If the US doesn't do it, maybe another country will step up to motivate the United States to it one day. A new space race is definitely what we need to draw new attention to NASA and their astronauts. I guess I can just sit here and hope....
bbh
I've only met one astronaut, cosmonaut actually, Gennady Strekalov, several years ago. I'm continually impressed by what these people do, however, they are no longer unique. With the ever expanding circle of those who have been above the atmosphere they become less distinct in the crowd.
I'd still dream of being an astronaut, but not at the expense of getting in the way as a bloody tourist, whom then comes back and poo-poos the whole shebang. It was quite an accomplishment for Sir Edmund Hillary to conquer Everest, particularly with what technology and the environment offered him in the way of equipment and protection from the elements, yet many standing upon his shoulders, with all today's advancements still fail and risk life the same as those aboard the Challenger did.
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Maybe get the Road Rules gang, to make sure that each shuttle mission has one closeted homosexual, one born again, one alcoholic, one troublemaker, one nymphomaniac.
Thanks for the link, I'll check it out, I'm always up for good discussion.
Before NASA there was the National Advisory Council on Aeronautics (NACA). NACA played a major part in jumpstarting American aviation between it's founding in 1916 and its merging into NASA in 1958. In a few years time we went from bold adventurers taking to the air in essentially experimental vehicles to the point where my father, a college student in the 30s, was able to buy a plane ticket from Chicago back to NJ after the Chicago Worlds Fair (1932). Hint: he wasn't rich.
This happenned in large part because NACA wasn't chasing glory for itself but instead supported fundamental research and worked with, not over aeronautical companies. In the 90s, the military funded a little project known as DC-X. It was an attempt to get back to the best way to do research -- build a little, test a little, see what happens, make improvements, repeat as needed. NASA chose as the successor to DC-X the X-33 -- a bureaucratic boondoggle that tried everything at once.
NASA is still in "Cold War" mode of trying to impress with spectaculars. The trouble is, the organization is now so screwed up that they're failing at too many spectaculars. NASA needs to change its mind set from trying to impress the public to developing new technologies that will involve the public, not just poorly entertain them.
"Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- B. Franklin
You have to remember that back then, the primary reason for going into space was for national prestige and oneupsmanship between the US and the Soviet Union. In an evironment like that, the countries involved are, of course, going to work hard to turn their astronauts and cosmonauts in superstars. That climate no longer exists and space is now a business. So space missions are more boring and practical and astronauts and cosmonauts are reduced to, well, drivers.
It's not that nobody knows them, it's just that not as many people follow the space program. It's not the nolity it used to be. There are people that follow every mission in detail and these are the people that are facinated with space and space travel. People have many more things to be interested in now with the advances in technology.
Murphy's Law of Copiers
I love the smell of Karma in the morning
When was the last time a space mission involved going up to save the planet from an asteroid or to stop an alien invasion?
I think people would rather watch a movie that keep up with the space program, and most people think all that money is a waste anyway.
...All I can say is that my life is pretty strange...
My suggestions:
If all you have are silver bullets, everything looks like a werewolf.
..to a couple thousand people, get a couple thosand different reasons. heres mine:
I blame the rise of the corporate media monopolies. Why publish/support/produce a government backed 'celebrity' when they are pouring millions into advertising to convince us we love the backstreet boys. In the days of the apollo astraunauts, you mainly had the big 3 tv networks...now you have the big 6, but they run much more than just tv.....
"Pussy: You spend 9 months trying to get out of it, and the rest of your life trying to get back in..."
I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
Solution is documented here.
Amerigo Vespuci - Who he?
History majors please correct me. Christopher Columbus was the European first ship captain to make landfall in the late 1400's. Amerigo Vespuci was the first captain to actually make landfall on the continent of North America, rather than islands. Thus, USians, Canadians, and Mexicans live in North America rather than North Columbia.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Orville and Wilbur Right were the first men to get aloft via mechanically-powered flight, but do you remember the name of the captain of the last airplane you flew on?
Christopher Columbus and Amerigo Vespuci are remembered in the names of cities and even continents all over the western hemisphere, but do you know the name of any given modern ship captain?
There are other examples, but this points to the fact that space travel is not only become routine, but more easily accomplished. It's still expensive, but the risk factor has gone done exponentially, even from the days of 1986, when the Space Shuttle Challenger detonated over the ocean.
Hopefully, in the near future, we'll look back at Neil, Buzz, and Christa with a sense of wonder.
We'll know that they were the pioneers, but that they opened the way for millions of 'nameless' others.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
What's stupid is hitting the Submit button without reading your own words.
What have today's astronauts done? Only strapped themselves into a huge, barely-controlled bomb and blasted themselves off the freakin planet. Just because somebody did it before doesn't make it any less crazy or remarkable. It's way, way different than hopping on a freighter for a few weeks, and it's insulting that you even make the comparison. There's no Coast Guard helicopter to drag you to safety if you lose an engine up there. Try applying to be an astronaut, and then try to join the Merchant Marine, and then get back to me with which is harder, 'kay?
There is NOTHING routine about going to space. If you fuck up just a little bit -- you die! If one of your mechanics or engineers screws up -- you die! If you happen to get unlucky and you're hit with a piece of debris or a meteorite -- you die! How is that routine? We earthbound types have no clue what zero-grav work is like, or what working in vacuum is like, and we shouldn't pretend that we do. Let's just agree that it's really, really hard.
We see and interpret today's missions as routine because a lot of people work real hard to make things work right. We consider it business as usual because the talking heads they point at us are the same talking heads we see for everything else. If NASA got rid of the PR-types, and just found a couple of engineers who were fairly telegenic, I'm sure they'd see a much better response from the public. As it is, they're selling their launches in much the same way as Toyota sells SUVs, or McDonalds sells Happy Meals, and it shouldn't work that way. Get a guy with real credibility, and real enthusiasm, to tell us how complicated and dangerous this is, not some slick infomercial salesdroid.
And finally: if you really want people to sit up and take notice, you have to do something Impossible. Like send people to Mars. Or start a permanent colony on the moon. In the meantime, the only way to wake people up about what NASA is doing is to have a very dramatic accident, where astronauts are very nearly killed, or even killed outright, and that's something I don't think they're willing to do right now.
We are too soon old, and too late smart.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
We live in a world where space travel is everywhere so it really isn't a big deal. 30 years ago it was new and exciting but now it is just a normal occurance.
Now if the Space Shuttle has to save us from a big ball of garbage, that would be something! :)
=-=-=-=-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Oh bother.
Betcha know who Thomas Edison is.
But have you ever heard of Pino Signoretto? No? But, he made light bulbs too!.
Whoopee! They risk their lives (and spend our money) to run other people's experiments in a floating school bus-- but mostly they're just truckers and mechanics.
It's always easy to be the low bidder when you know you'll neither be chosen, nor held to task. Both the Mars Society and Zubrin plans rely heavily on undeveloped, unproved technology, that will 'somehow' be cheaper than what we have now.
See:
http://www.orbdev.com
Growing up in Houston there was always a buzz about NASA and space travel. I mean in school several times a year Astronauts came in to basically make a sales pitch to get kids interested in the space program.
However the days of the heralded Names has been lost and forgotten. Why else would NASA have brought back John Glenn? They are seeking an identity that has continued to fade and came dangerously close to being lost with the Challenger loss.
Side note: When I was in 3rd or 4th grade they were telling me when I was 30 I would be taking vacations to the moon. All I can say is they had better hurry cause they have 3 years.
Razzious Domini
Razzious Domini
I could be a GREAT KARMA WHORE if I could just shed the few morals I have left.
Oh my God! Like, no duh, Mr. Warhol.
It's no secret, but NASA is getting a bit dull these days. What those boys need is a big makeover. A little glamour dust, a little something that says "We're proud to be us!"
Maybe the astronauts could take just a few moments off from their busy schedule learning about science and learn how to apply a bit of makeup for the cameras. They look so pale on television! Looks like someone needs a fashion consultant.
It's no wonder NASA is in the "crappa". They need to take a clue from the folks in Hollywood that really know what they're doing, and get a bit of "star powa"!
They could always try traveling to other dimensions looking for server software... err, wait, thats been done too...
I've got a plastic space shuttle that was one of my more cherished toys when I was 3 (22 years ago).
That's very interesting, especially since the shuttle didn't start flying until 21 years ago.
God became man to enable men to become sons of God. -C.S. Lewis
If you want astronauts to be famous ... send famous people into space. When John Glenn went up, the launch received its highest ratings in recent memory. Press coverage would increase, too.
Personally, I'd be perfectly happy to launch any number of irritating teen-band icons into solar orbit, never to return. Say ... this gives me an idea for a Slashdot poll ...
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Who do we blame for this?
The news media thats who... space exploration is still a fascinating topic and the people who risk everything to further mankinds knowledge of the great beyond are still very much heroes...
But until they send a dude to Mars I dont think the news media will be interested, therefore only space nuts will get to know about what is going on.
The first thing that NASA should do is hire a good PR firm, and bring their astronauts (and dare I say it, their engineers) to the national spotlight.
Other people have posted that astronauts shouldn't be any more famous than commercial pilots, but this is totally wrong - flying from SFO to SEA is commonplace, exploring space is still the cutting edge. What we need is more excitement around our national space program, not a sense of detachment.
After all, our most important mission as humanity is to get ourselves off this rock.
Invisible Agent
Invisible Agent
This post is a mirror; when a monkey stares in, no hacker gazes out.
Nobody knows who astronauts are because they don't do anything groundbreaking anymore. It's been done.
Get over it.
nobody will remember the expression "going postal", instead they'll say "going nasal"
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
I bet everybody will remember for quite some time that guy who paid some 20 million to go into space.
What was his name?....
Remember, when you are downloading MP3's, you are downloading communism!!!
badness 10000
Once the guy down the street tries to launch himself in his own rocket, believe you me, people will pay attention. But today's shuttle launches, perhaps not all that safe, are certainly much more safe than the early pioneers.
A manned space program is an expensive endeavor. But it makes sense to spend money where it has the longest, biggest payoff. The short answer to minimize costs is to modernize both manned and unmanned launch vehicles. According to this (http://www.enn.com/enn-news-archive/2000/06/06172 000/plasma_13933.asp&e=42), the payoff of a small suite of new rockets will be significant in terms of costs and space-accessibility.
See http://www.enn.com/enn-news-archive/2000/06/061720 00/plasma_13933.asp&e=42)
I suggest anyone who hasnt already read, and even if you have, to read Space by Michener. In it he foretells the decline of the NASA in public view and the shift back to religion. It's really a quote provoking article
I personally find the public's disconcern of NASA and astronauts to be disappointing. Space is not the candyland that the public thinks it is; the dangers are still very real. It will probably take another disaster such as the challenger accident or Apollo 13 to bring the public's attention back to NASA. Unfortunately this only brings some people to attack the organization taht has brung so much technology into our lifes.
Originally NASA was the figurehead of the cold war, the race America won. It was about overthrowing the communists, the hated enemy, and not about the growth of human kind that it should have been about. One could only hope that people would concentrate on the unity that the International Space Station brings. Cosmonauts and Astronauts, once enemies, now flying together, building the biggest spacestation since the MIR.
But the worst part is that without the support of the public NASA's budget suffers, leading to shoddy programs and programs that aren't as ambitious as before.
Those who say that going to the moon was big, it wasn't: a mere 200,000 mile romp into space for a short amount of time. An accomplishment in itself, but an accomplishment that could be become moot if NASA were given a real chance to make true space travel. I view this only as a first stepping stone of a great journey, one that the public may have become disinterested in.
Maybe the prospect of sending people into space does not galvanize the public anymore, but it is still pretty awesome to be there when the shuttle launches. I left home at 2:30 this morning with a friend who scored a base pass. After seeing and feeling the launch in the predawn darkness I was awed. People may not care about seeing Tv coverage so much, but the feeling is still alive for all the people who are lucky enough to see the launch in person. Now somebody fetch me my cynicism...