Slashdot Mirror
NASA Rolls Out Space Exploration Roadmap
MarkWhittington writes "NASA and the space agencies of a variety of countries, including members of the European Union, Canada, Japan, Russia, India, the Ukraine, and South Korea, have rolled out the latest version of a space exploration roadmap (PDF). NASA and its partners have created two scenarios, called 'Asteroid Next' and 'Moon Next.' This represents the continuing argument over which destination astronaut explorers should go to first. Should it be an Earth approaching asteroid, as President Obama insists? Or should it be the moon, as many people in Congress, NASA, and NASA's partner agencies suggest? In any event, all roads lead to Mars in the current plan. Both visits to an asteroid and to the moon are considered practice runs for what will be needed to go to Mars."
called 'Asteroid NeXT' and 'Moon NeXT".
NASA needs guaranteed funding and a minimum of Congressional oversight.
Im glad to see the governments lack of interest in NASA and their groundbreaking work has not disheartened them from trying anyway. Kudos to them.
How about we go to an asteroid that's landing on the moon?
It's hard to get anywhere in space without spaceships. Where is their budget planning on coming from here?
The first sentence of TFA says this is a plan for "coordinated human and robotic exploration." The summary makes it sound like this is a plan for manned exploration only.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
It's interesting that NASA doesn't mention the GLXP at all in there, not even in passing (or so shows my very fast scan of the document). That contrasts quite a bit with the fact that they generated the NASA Heritage Site rules and what they briefed and said to the GLXP teams in July.
Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
The rovers were a success. Now it is time to test our ability to create a long term orbital platform. I'm for the asteroid. China has shown an interest in going to the moon. Let them perform those experiments.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Somehow the idea of international cooperation seems to make sense in the modern era. Although we Americans rightly take pride in the Apollo program, the space race was really a product of the Cold War. It ruled out multilateral efforts because the whole point was a race to beat the Russians. That doesn't make sense today; nation-states don't have the same kind of rivalries. The spirit of "advancement of human civilization" I associate with space exploration does seem more fitting as an international enterprise. It gives me a warm fuzzy.
That said, the reality of international undertakings tends to fall short of what I consider ideal.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Roadmap? Why not a starchart?
I want to see manned exploration of our sun.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Don't want to know how much that shiny PDF document cost. A billion? Two billion?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
- douglas quaid
1. Adopt a plan
2. Spend a ton of money
3. Abandon achievements and the plan.
4. Repeat.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Let me be the first one in this thread to advocate for THE CASE FOR MARS by Robert Zubrin. They should skip the asteroid and the moon, and start sending robotic missions to Mars today. When the robots have manufactured a liveable environment (e.g. caves or lava tubes) and enough fuel for an emergency return trip, then you send the astronauts.
The two routes are presented as exclusive, and only differ in the order of the targets. I say there's a third route: Moon, Mars+Asteroid, Beyond.
Landing on an asteroid is orders of magnitude more difficult than on the Moon or a planet: chances are a lot greater that you'll miss, and there's not a lot of possibilities for in-situ resource utilization, while return windows are possibly few and far between.
It would be safer and more profitable to go to an asteroid at the same time we're building presence on Mars. Hell, Mars has two asteroids for moons, perfect practice ground. The way I see this would be a hybrid of the two scenarios outlined: we deploy a deep space habitat, set up a permanently crewed base on the Moon as a 'pit stop', then take advantage of the lower gravity to launch towards Mars, and later, still from the Moon, towards an interesting asteroid. The first asteroid mission could even be the deployment of a thruster to send the asteroid into a more accessible and safer orbit as a starting point.
This would allow us the most time to test new technologies before plunging into the most dangerous missions during the exploration phase, then to leverage those technologies in the exploitation phase that inevitably (and rightly) follows.
Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
The boss usually gets to express his opinion.
China will be working towards Mars. If you are going to do it, AIM HIGH!
I was eight years old when Neil Armstrong set boots on the Moon; I should have lived to see a thriving colony on Mars! I'm not dead yet, but these sickening roadmaps make it obvious that the chance of me living long enough to see ANY offworld colony is pretty slim. What the fuck happened?
I share Neil Armstrong's frustration, but I don't blame NASA; NASA isn't the problem. The problem is that the species is dominated by short-sighted, ignorant, isolationist fools... and that foolish majority is not only allowed to choose our leadership but is also the pool from which that leadership is chosen. WE collectively are the problem.
We've used NASA as a political football in a decades-long game of tug-of-war; how would you like to administer or work in an agency whose funding and priorities get temptingly dangled close enough to nibble one year but then yanked far out of reach the next, at the whim of Congressional purseholders beholden to public attitudes and corporate shareholders? NASA has been suffering from manic depression for decades because of it.
Neil needs to place the blame squarely where it belongs. How many more generations of visionaries will have their hopes and dreams crushed under the weight of an ignorant mob of billions?
... you're on the road to becoming part of the problem in your country.
The "American" problems which you so accurately point to are in no small part due to idealists turning into lobbyists.
Anybody can lobby, and, unfortunately, it's addictive.
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
When you go to the government for funding, you don't want to admit you have options.
That is, unless you really don't need the funding.
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
Rather than make pie in the sky plans for moon missions or asteroid missions, how about a good, solid foundation of getting people the first 100 miles. Plan for that. Achieve that goal and THEN see about trying to get further out, based on an actual, sensible reason for going.
Every journey starts with a first step.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
It should be an astronomical body (moon, asteroid, etc) that has a potential payoff say in scarce minerals like lithium, platinium, uranium (unobtainium) or water. It should be something that would provide a raw resource to offset the costs associated with space travel or to make an aspect of space travel possible that would not have been possible without it.
Water as fuel when combined with solar energy. Water to produce breathable oxygen. Soil that could be used to support the growth of plants. Uranium oxide to refine into fuel ... in space. Something that we can use without having to bring it with us to help continue space exploration.
The Russians have as many problems with the heavy lift as the Americans do. (Check the news recently?) They just have less problems with insurance companies.
Not sure why the Canadians should be seen as better than the Japanese at robotics. But robotics has a significantly wider field of application than heavy lift. (Not disjoint, even?) And even if the Japanese are better at some kinds of robotics and the Canadians are better at some kinds of robotics, cooperation does not mean just turning all of job X over to some other guy.
We're all in this mess together. The only good reason for space exploration is to give us more areas to keep pioneering in, to keep us from turning all of our technology over to making the next bigger and faster game console.
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
The reason is that private space wants to go to the moon. We should take advantage of this. The X-prizes, and COTS approach is paying off with equipment being developed. Even the sub-orbitals, such as blue origin, will be interesting in that their equipment with some mods and MINIMAL amounts of ground set-up, will be capable of working on/off the moon. Basically, the moon is a good step for private space along with gov. help. But when going beyond the moon, that is where NASA should focus. Sending a small crew to an asteroid is a good first step to Mars. Well, that is the kind of things that private space will NOT do. Likewise, having NASA and others work on tugs esp. nuclear engines such as NERVA, makes good sense.
Private space is planning on being on the moon by 2020.
So, lets do both the moon and an asteroid.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Sustaining the long haul with the Apollo was seen as too expensive.
It hasn't gotten less expensive, we have just become more willing to spend money. (Setting aside the question of whether we have the money to spend. Except, if we were willing to spend money on those big toys, why weren't we spending money fighting poverty? and there were too many people who couldn't see that space exploration was one essential part of the overall approach to fighting poverty.)
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
The president is not supposed to be anybody's boss.
Well, except for the executive branch of the government, subject to restrictions set by the Constitution and Congress.
About the only group he is the boss of is his cabinet, and not really even that.
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
You can go first.
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
While I agree with you that Battlestar Galactica (sp?), Star Wars, et. al. are just cowboy movies shifted to space, and not realistic goals for our future as a race, I disagree with your assessment of the space program. As someone else pointed out already, the space program is a good place to sharpen the tools we call our technology.
Tools are usefull things, and keeping them in good working condition is important.
Promoting the worship of technology is bad, whether through space fantasy or game machines, but until we can teach the majority of people what true religion is, we can of have to let them get by on what they can believe in.
And, either way, space exploration is (or can be) a valid way to refine and add to our technological toolset.
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
We still don't have enough experience getting people through space in healthy condition. That's why we work on getting back to the moon.
That and all the science that remains to be done on the moon.
Also, while the environment-related tech for the moon and for Mars will be drastically different, learning how to deal with the moon's environment will only help learning how to deal with the environment on Mars. Seeing any of these options as mutually exclusive is missing the entire point of space exploration.
Panic programs to get us (back or otherwise) to X in Y time are not a particularly good idea, however.
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
I am constantly frustrated with Yet Another Plan for Humans In Space. When will the politicians finally recognize the folly and waste in trying to put Humans into an environment completely unsuited for them? Do we see bizarre unrealistic plans to colonize Antartica? or the bottom of the sea? Then why this fetish about putting humans in outer space? Because of the constant re-runs of Star Trek and Stargate on the Syfy channel? Who believes that crap? It's patently obvious that the future belongs to the machines.. and only the machines.. Machines designed and constructed to excel in their target environment. I speak not from random passion, but from actual experience. I'm a 10 year veteran of JPL. We built machines there that *worked*, that explored the outer planets, and returned vast amounts of serious data. We should not be wasting another dime on putting humans any higher than 50,000 feet. Everything above that should be done by machines, and the best AI we can muster. Money should be poured into radiation resistant computing, AI, and self repairing electronics with massive redundancy. We need to establish AI operated bases on the moon and near earth asteroids, in order to start using the matter for construction of space based observation and computing platforms. No question, the future of the human civilization is *in* space.... with the machines we create. Not with monkeys in space.
NASA is full of bureaucratic morons trying to justify their fat government pay checks. unless they want to continue their slide in credibility and funding, they had better sort their shit out and get a clue.
How about for a first priority: MAKE ACCESS TO LOW EARTH ORBIT CHEAPER, SAFER, MORE RELIABLE AND MORE REGULAR
NASA can make whatever plans they want, but the cold war is over, Kennedy is dead, and they will never have the budget to go to the moon the same way again. Period.
They haven't even got an operational space shuttle any more for crap sake.
The only thing this useless waste of paper might achieve is offering some ideas to the Russians.
Hint to NASA morons: Voters don't give a shit about where astronauts go next if there is no immediate tangible benefit for them. It isn't greed, its just common sense. NASA is squandering millions in hard-earned tax payer dollars, and for what?
One apon a time NASA was doing great things and paving the way for technological progress. The people who could be making the difference are being drowned out by political and ommercial interests.
I predict that either the Russians will take the moon, or western society will eventually wake up and revolt to end the scurge of corrupttion and greed that is our capitalist economy. No I'm not advocating communism as the answer, rather what (in Australia) is called "non-trading cooperatives"
http://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/CA256EB5000644CE/page/Business+names-Co-operatives
If I had to bet, I'd go with the Russians
I agree with you up to the point where you fail to mention that the US has a defense budget over 20x greater than the amount funneled to NASA. Half the defense budget would be more than enough to set up a small Mars colony if you go by Zubrin's math.
A VASIMR type plasma rocket can haul back 20x it's fuel weight in from a nearby asteroid. Since part of most rocks is Oxygen, you can extract that and use it for fuel for later trips, and keep hauling back more asteroid chunks. What do you do with all that asteroid stuff in Earth Orbit? Any metals can go to building living quarters and machines. Any carbon can be used to create space elevator cable. Some oxygen is good for breathing, some for fuel, and some to make water with. You still need to bring the Hydrogen from Earth, but that's only 11% by weight.
This approach does two things. The partial space elevator makes it easier to bring stuff up from Earth. The ability to bring back and use materials from asteroids cuts the percentage of stuff you need to bring from Earth. Those multiply together. For example, if launch costs are reduced to 20% of what they were before, and you can supply 80% of your materials from asteroids, then combined your cost to get something done is reduced by 25 times.
Interestingly the list of countries involved in the Global Exploration Roadmap doesn't include China. It includes all nations with a recognized capability to send a bucket of metal to outer space, such as Russia, the Europeans (counted as one), individual European states such as France and Germany, India, and Japan.
China, as the fourth or third greatest space power (after the US and Russia, and maybe Japan), is missing from the group. I can understand the absence of possible small space powers like Iran, Israel and North Korea, but China? Is there some mysterious reason behind China's go-it-alone attitude in space?
Option 4: the whole world is fucked anyway, so lets nuke the whole planet from orbit.
"its the only way to be sure" - Ellen Ripley
How many people have made that "walk to the corner drugstore"?
You're assuming we have a lot more experience in space than we have. Meaningful human activity on Mars is just not going to happen until we have a lot more experience in space.
Computer memory is just fancy paper, CPUs just fancy pens with fancy erasers; the 'net is just a fancy backyard fence.
Does anyone else find it sad that NASA+NORAD+whoever can detect a small missile launch on the other side of the world in minutes, but can't predict when or where a satellite THEY PUT UP THERE THEMSELVES will land or even IF it has landed already?!?
Why is it always the Ukraine, it's not like there are multiple Ukraines. Is anyone familiar with any other countries that get a the? And how did the the even come about as common usage when referring to Ukraine?
is simply "ukraine" - no "the"
I love the "give them everything they need and leave them alone" comments. Wouldn't everyone in the government - hell, everyone in the world! - love to get that deal?!! "Hey, give me and my family a shit-load of money - everything we say we need - and then leave us alone until we ask for more, then give us that, too, and leave us alone again, repeat." The US military "Hey, let us design an astronomically expensive defense budget with technologies that don't exist, then give us more money that anyone else has, then leave us the hell alone - no oversight, no accountability, and no cuts, dammit!"
Yeah, great plan.
Until we get our debut under control - sorry, Macraig, not in our lifetimes - this needs to go into slow-motion, robotics, and R&D only. We are talking about the very survival of the US, maybe the Western world, being at stake here. And you idealists think we should fly men to space rocks?
Here's an idea: Give NASA everything eveyone elects to give on their tax forms, like the Federal Election election. If this is so damn important to the public, they'll fund it. If not, NASA can go back to having sexy astronauts flying expensive T-38 jets around to public affairs gigs and leave the rest of us the fuck alone.
Why are people so defensive about NASA?
How much money has been pumped into NASA? The NASA lovers dont care if we spend 100% of our GDP, allocate every man woman and child to the advancement of space exploration, force scientists to work at the end of a gun barrel, and use eugenics to purge the planet of non scientists in order to create more scientists, NOTHING WILL EVER BE ENOUGH.
NASA had so much money they should have explored the galaxy ten times over by now. The fact is that theres only so much we were capable of and science doesnt always progress as fast as we want. Money is wasted, waste is created, etc.
NASA needed to get reeled in a long time ago. I still think it needs to exist, but not as the GIANT it has become. Scientists should not look to NASA for jobs or money, they should look to NASA to offload ideas they created elsewhere And not as a payday, but for the good of humanity. America doesnt want to admit that we are dependant on government for jobs and capital. There is not many other ways to "make it by".
I beleive in a vast conspiracy of the government that prints money to keep afloat and create an economy that strives for nothing more then self preservation and quality of life and subsidizes almost all aspects of it. There will never be "Power to the people", the power struggles have been decided long ago, and nothing short of violent civil war will ever change the puppet masters at the top unfortunatly. They control the capital in our capitalistic society and are doing a horrible job of it. They want slaves that drain their brains in order to create weapons to rule the world (Our defense industry) and the rest of us to follow party lines. Our food industry, our entertainment industry, our communications industry, ALL monopoly's and began or eventually became government subsidized.
People wake up and see NASA for what it was, a monumental waste of money, unsustainable, and basically just one big government subsidy that is no way our tax dollars were affording without the money masters running printing presses nonstop and hoping we wouldnt notice.
He's boss of the entire executive branch. Whether you like Obama or not doesn't diminish his authority.
Leaving Earth to go into Space seems to be becoming easier every day. It is almost getting to the point that the hard task is the return from space to Earth is the hard dangerous task. We all know what can happen as our first Space shuttle to leave Earth, the STS Space Shuttle Columbia burned up as it re-entered the Atmosphere over New Mexico and Texas. The silicon heat dissipating tiles are able to protect the shuttle from the 2,300 degrees of friction Atmospheric heat created by friction with the Earth's Atmosphere. The tiles work perfectly when they are in perfect shape, but in non visable damage the Columbia could not.
Just as the Challenger exploded on takeoff nearly 20 years before I started searching for a solution to the problem. I could find nothing to replace the tiles. So I had to look at something to replace the tile system of protection. The simple solution is to reduce the velocity from an orbital speed of 17,500 MPH to Zero with in a distance of around 30 miles. That is a reduction of speed at a rate that did not alter the gravity rate beyond human tolerance's.. To do such a change fuel is needed to decelerate to an acceptable velocity for human survival. But this process is much similar to soaking your drum sticks in nitroglycerine and playing a drum solo in a rock concert.
My final solution uses matter in what is know as the fourth state of matter, you have gas,liquid and solid but the fourth state is called plasma. In the early 90's the USSR has been rumored to have tested plasma shields for it's hyper velocity jets. Since it was hard and rare to find the minerals that could take the heat that leading edge structures had to survive through at the velocities the jet engines could accelerate or trust objects to. I do not know of the results or if the rumor is even true or not. But if you place a plasma shield between a damaging force and a vulnerable object. None of the damaging forces can traverse though the plasma to damage what is to be protected. This plasma shield is what has protected all rocket trusted before the shuttle and it's heat shielding tiles. Now if we were to create a protective shield around our spacecraft our spaceship could land safely.
The hard rart will be creating a continuous plasma shield as to reenter the planet safely, One other note there is some UFO reports that state plasma is also used. This may take years to develop, but I do think it could be looked into as a solution. UFO's may not be real but if they are could this be a feature they use.