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."

Comments

Re:International coordination?

[pnewhook]

Agreed. The Russians are the best at heavy lift, the Canadians are the best at robotics. There is no point in the US trying to reinvent the wheel. Leave those technologies to them and focus NASA funding elsewhere.

Nobody called Zubrin -

[Darth Snowshoe]

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.

Re:I really

[Jeng]

Many people don't give a shit about exploration if there is no human present.

Yea the rovers have been a great success and they have some more in the works, but if we don't land boots on the ground the thought is that we did nothing.

It's not graft-driven government corruption, it's a ratings gimmick. If the majority of Americans start giving a shit about exploration then there will be more pressure on congress to fund NASA better. At this time most people just plain don't give a shit so NASA's budget is getting diminished.

Re:I really

[Un pobre guey]

I don't think it leaves all that much emotion on the ground. As a poster above noted, most Americans probably don't give a crap about manned space exploration or NASA. The only people who are really invested are those that make money through NASA contracts.

I don't agree that it costs a trivial amount of money. That is the old argument based on comparing NASA's budget with the total Federal budget, a rather goofy comparison. That can be claimed about any government program, but sum them all up and sum them with our ridiculously evil military adventures and you bleed an extra trillion dollars a year that must be paid by incurring more debt. Manned space exploration is a corrupt waste, better to cut it and save the money, and do the same for every government program that is little more than pork for the lobbyist-wielding plutocracy.

Too little too late (for me)

[macraig]

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?

It should be both asteroids and moon

[WindBourne]

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.