Slashdot Mirror
USA To Return To Moon By 2015, Then Mars
securitas writes "This afternoon George Bush announced space exploration plans for the USA to return to the Moon by 2015, the design and construction of a new space vehicle fleet by 2014 (called the Crew Exploration Vehicle) to replace the aging space shuttles which will be retired in 2010, and the construction of a permanent Moon base, followed by manned missions to Mars. The initiative begins with a $1 billion increase to NASA's budget and $12 billion in new space exploration money over next five years. However Congress is concerned about how to pay for the new space policy initiative in the face of a $500 billion national budget deficit. AP via Yahoo has a Moon/Mars/space policy FAQ, and there's more at NASA and the New York Times among others."
I, for one, welcome our new human overlords.
The current shuttle fleet has computers less powerful than the modern car and structural materials about as sophisticated as a shopping trolley.
Which is not necessarily a bad thing. Take, for instance, the International Ultraviolet Explorer; build on 1960s computer and materials technology, launched in 1978 for a 3 year mission. How long did it last? 18 years. Take it from me, we don't build 'em like this anymore.
In our rush toward the bright future, we have thrown out much of the robustness which made 1960s technology very spaceworthy. An example: memory subsystems based on ferrite cores are much more difficult to fry by cosmic radiation than those based on transistors.
Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
We will be out of IRAQ and Afghanistan by 2020....
Shudders? SHUDDERS? ARE YOU INSANSE.
THink of the possibilities! Hell the goddam porn industry could fund this entire exhibition. Zero-G pr0n with your favorite actress'! Sweet god almighty the amount of money that this could make just boggles the mind.
p.s.
Personally, it's always been my life long goal to go to space and have wild kinky sex. Specifically I want to launch my self from one end of the capsule and um.. "spear" my lady. Goddam. A thing of beauty. And don't pretend you haven't thought of it either.
Conservatives roasted Clinton for that sort of thing, but if you check Republican's pockets, I bet you'll find a cigar. Hypocrisy.
This is America, damnit. Speak Spanish!
Evil? You've been listening to Bush's rhetoric and BS for too long. Saddam has nothing on his contemporaries of "the last two generations". Ever heard of Pol Pot? He was orders of magnitude worse.
It's a concept called the Triad. ICBMs and SLBMs may not be as invulnerable as we'd like (and eventually stealth will lose its protection). Defense planning also needs to take into account capabilities of potential opponents. Russia still has numerous ICBMs that are designed as first strike weapons. In fact, this one of the few areas Russia is actually purchasing military hardware (as opposed to selling it to the first person whose check clears).
"Five times over?" You should take a look at the cutbacks in the nuclear forces in the last 14 years. Peacekeeper? Gone. Trident boats? Cut dramatically. B1's? Taken out of SIOP. Same with B52s. B2 is our only airborne strategic nuke platform. You can recall a plane, can't recall an ICBM.
Hey, I love using robots too. I just think that getting folks in space is important too. It's too bad the International Space Station is such a drain. The cost of that boondoggle would fund quite a few dozen robotic missions.
Learn.
So, what was the last nuclear war started by ICBMs? IIRC, the last two nukes used were air-delivered. Other than that your post makes no sense, but that fits with your sig...
First nuclear war we won. Japan not having nukes doesn't mean it wasn't a nuclear war, just that it was one sided (the best type of war).
There's no evidence that a nuclear war is unwinnable. A total exchange of all the nukes in existence would be a bit uncomfortable, but there's nothing that proves a war between say India/Pakistan would lead to global nuclear war.
Now you're saying SLBMS are the key, not ICBMS? SLBMS have better survival abilities than ICBMs, but their accuracy (even with Trident D5) is lower than Peacekeeper used to be.
Plus you haven't given any proof other than your opinion that B2s wouldn't be survivable as a retaliatory weapon. Care to try again?