Slashdot Mirror


Hubble Upgraded; NASA's Future Not So Bright

jokrswild writes: "After 5 space walks and 172 million dollars, Hubble has been successfully redeployed. Hopefully it will be able to amaze us yet again in its abilities to capture the unimaginable." And Captn Pepe writes: "Space.com has a couple of articles regarding what the Congressional Research Service and what NASA's new chief administrator have to say about the space agency's future plans and prospects. The short version is, don't hold your breath for a Mars mission."

13 of 238 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Manned space travel is pointless. by hkhanna · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Space travel and starving kids are two completely separate things. Why again are these connected, and how does funding one detract from another? It's not like the U.S. government would or even could use those funds saved from no space travel to feed starving kids.

    If I'm missing something, please, enlighten me.
    Hargun

    --

    Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
  2. Re:Manned space travel is pointless. by jerryasher · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You fall into a trap when you engage in zero-sum games. Must it be "either or"? How come it can't be both?

    If you save a buck from NASA's budget, do you believe this administration or this congress is going to fund UNESCO? Or do you kinda sorta suspect they are going to give that buck to a favorite corporate son?

  3. Mars by 3141 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    don't hold your breath for a Mars mission.

    Unless it's from China.

  4. Pop Quiz by cybermage · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ok, let's say you're an elected member of congress. How would your constituents like you to prioritize the following:

    A. Fight Terrorists
    B. Fix Economy
    C. Teach Our Children
    D. Fight Crime
    E. Cut Taxes
    F. Reduce deficit/Debt Reduction
    G. Explore Mars

    Assuming you don't have enough money for everything, what do you leave out?

    If you want NASA to go to Mars, I'd suggest you help the Chinese do it: The only thing that might sway congressional self-interest is competition. Nothing took the wind out of NASA's sails like the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    1. Re:Pop Quiz by xmark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      OK, let's say you are Queen Isabella of Spain. Christopher Columbus comes to you with some high-budget whacko proposal to send a small flotilla to the "other side of the world" when no one even knows if there is another side of the world.

      How do you prioritize the following?
      1. Keep funding the war with the English.
      2. Keep funding your own court and all of the sycophants whose political support keeps you in power.
      3. Keep paying the Vatican tribute so that you can get your sorry ass into Heaven through papal dispensation.
      4. Keep throwing bones (in the form of subsidized wine and cut-rate fish prices) to the starving peasants who constitute the single largest economic class in your fading country.
      5. Keep slipping dough to support the pirates who make the Dutch mercantilists' lives hard and prevent you from totally ceding international trade to a bunch of guys wearing wooden shoes.

      The more times change the more they stay the same.

    2. Re:Pop Quiz by Dr_EddieB · · Score: 5, Funny

      There was a story floating around recently about a member of NSYNC paying to go into space as a 'entertainment trip' sort of thing. This could be used to pay for a mission to Mars without tax money. Many people, myself included, would be willing to kick in money to send the entire band of NSYNC into space, with the stipulation that they do not return.

  5. Talk About A Low Budget! by GeekLife.com · · Score: 5, Funny

    They must really be cutting back if they're recommending people holding their breath on the Mars mission.

  6. Let's have a nasa rider by bmetz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You know those stupid "would you like to give $5 to the so-and-so party?" lines at the bottom of the 1040? Well, why not have a "would you like to give $5 to the send-a-man-to-mars fund?" I'll pretty much die before I give a dollar to a politician so he can put my name on a "sucker to call when I need more money" telemarketing list but I'll gladly give money to a cause that means something on a historical scale like this.

    --
    What did you eat today? http://www.atetoday.com/
  7. Just a point, but... by anzha · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Just such a horrible thought! Making NASA accountable for what it spends!

    After all look at the blazing fiscal successes of the International Space Station and it being able to come in under budget!!!

    Or the success of the X-33...

    Or X-34...

    Or the X-30...

    Or how about how the shuttle and how much it brought down launch costs just like they said it would...

    Maybe there is a theme here, huh?

    Perhaps when NASA learns some fiscal responsibility then we'll get our mission to Mars from them. And it's quite possible the wonderous big budgets of Apollo aren't EVER coming back.

    In the mean time, it might actually be others who get there first. And, no, I don't mean other nations. John Carmack (yes, that John Carmack) is working on his one rocket company:here and Jeff Greasona nd crew are working on their own stuff here.

    I might just wanna give them some competition myself...;)

    --
    Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
  8. Re:Retiring Hubble by Stripsurge · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Next generation space telescope is what you're looking for.

    With the way cutbacks are being made, perhaps Hubble's life will be extended a bit longer while the NGST is put on hold for a couple years. I seem to remember reading something about Hubble being run at the same time as the NGST for a little while. Too lazy to look though.

    I guess after a while the computers and other equipment eventualy break down over time because of all the radiation and junk. I realize that they built this thing with radiation shields and whatnot, but I don't think they stop everything 100% forever.

  9. Mars or Bust. by Schwarzchild · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Certainly going to Mars may not be popular with Congress or with the President but think about it in other terms. Putting an American on Mars could be a way to show the world and especially terrorists that America isn't going to sit on its laurels, that it will continue to innovate and explore.

    We need something to cheer for or at least a place other than Earth to escape to.

    Let's Explore Mars.

    --

    "sweet dreams are made of this..."

  10. A manned mission to Mars by NetSerf2000 · · Score: 5, Funny
    Honestly, I think that we should load all the terrorists and all the dumb ass politicians from around the world who are a bunch of low-brow rednecks and send them off to mar's so that they can settle their differences up there and leave the rest of the human race in peace...

    Maybe just to make it interesting for the rest of us, send up about 50 camera's as well and a limited supply of oxygen and they have to fight for the right to be the last person breathing up there... and possibly get a free ride home...

    That way, everyone left back here gets the best of all worlds...

    Mars gets a manned mission,
    We stop the fight against terrorism,

    AND *shudder* for the reality tv freaks out there, they get the ultimate reality show of all time...

    Ohhh... and as a side benefit, we also get rid of all those useless politicians who are just screwing up everything for everyone else...



    *** I had a .sig, but I went and got a life ***

    --
    *** I had a .sig, but then I got a life ***
  11. The space lottery by Pelerin · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The analogy with Columbus fails on a couple of respects, like the risk vs. benefit calculation.

    Columbus new that the risks in his mission were manageable, and the immediate payoff was high. (Of course, Spain went on to become a gold-based economy, importing pretty much all manufactured goods and got their clocks cleaned by British wool and things like that; quickly losing its world status, but that's another story). The risks of a manned Mars mission are unknown in some pretty important areas, all having to do with long-term exposure to space, for both humans and machines.

    Consider the moon landing. 10 Apollo spacecraft came before the one that made it. One of those (Apollo 3) burned horribly on the launch pad. And thanks to Hollywood we all know that Apollo 13 also failed to reach the moon. That's 2 failures in 13 missions; a 15% failure rate, and only considering technical failures, since the risks in the human biology area for that kind of mission were understood reasonably well by then, thanks to a succession of manned orbital flights.

    Now consider a Mars mission. We don't know what effects on human bodies (and minds!) will result from prolonged exposure to radiation and zero gravity for a mission that lasts that long, except they all look pretty bad. And while unmanned space probes have continued functioning for decades in space, they don't have life-support systems so we don't know what the risks are in that area either.

    So it seems to me that advocating a manned Mars mission now is not very rational. We would simply be praying we get lucky, but the odds right now don't look very good.

    We (the world, not just the US) need to know a whole lot more about what's involved before making any kind of vaguely rational decision to go to Mars. Use the Space Station to the max. Also put another one in orbit around the Moon for a few years. Learn what the glitches are likely to be and then decide.