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."

21 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. The roadmap is nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    NASA needs guaranteed funding and a minimum of Congressional oversight.

    1. Re:The roadmap is nothing by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sadly AC has the truth of it. This plan should be labled "Current roadmap for the next 20-30 years... unless whoever is elected to congress and the presidency in the next couple of years change their mind. again."

  2. Why not both? by flaming+error · · Score: 3, Funny

    How about we go to an asteroid that's landing on the moon?

  3. Mining already a success. by sgt+scrub · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Mining already a success. by Genda · · Score: 2

      There are some several good reasons to look at an asteroid as a first choice. Of course, the best reason to pick the moon is that its only 250,000 miles away, and if anything goes wrong you have even odds of getting home without it ending posthumously. That's why heavy, heavy robotic applications must be first. Build robots that can collect solar power, mine ore, sinter ceramics, build more robots, extract water, air, and organics. Most of all construct living spaces under enough material to protect from radiation and huge temperature extremes. Once you have a functioning self replicating robot swarm building safe habitats including rotation to simulate gravity, you now have an effective ferry, with a shallow gravity well, capable of transporting significant loads to and from mars and the asteroid belt, which contains riches beyond measure.

      Every large asteroid in the inner solar system should have a human population on it.

  4. Roadmap? by RollingThunder · · Score: 3, Funny

    Roadmap? Why not a starchart?

  5. I really by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    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.
    1. Re:I really by Jeng · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    2. Re:I really by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      manned space exploration [...] is a worthless, purposeless enterprise

      We choose to go to the moon in this decade, and to do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.

      I truly pity you, sir. I'll get my grandchildren to send you a nice postcard from Alpha Centauri.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:I really by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Only true-believing sci fi space adventure magical religious cultists are gullible enough to swallow the "space exploration" excuse.

      Boy, you are brave. Dissing 98% of the Slashdot demographic.

      And while you're correct on purely rational grounds, humans aren't purely rational and canning manned flight for just robotics leaves a lot of emotion on the ground. Given that space exploration really comprises a trivial amount of human and financial capital, all things considered, the added emotional involvement of human spaceflight is more than justified.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  6. get your ass to mars by wasteoid · · Score: 2

    - douglas quaid

  7. Re:International coordination? by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    --
    Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
  8. The REAL Roadmap by sycodon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:The REAL Roadmap by Biff+Stu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's the roadmap summary. Here's the detailed roadmap:

      1. Adopt a plan.
      2. Make the plan more ambitious at the insistence of the President and Congress.
      3. Receive 30% of the required funding from congress, 25% of which is non mission-critical pork.
      4. Overrun lowball funding by a factor of 3.
      5. Congress cuts off funding before real accomplishments can be met.
      6. Repeat

  9. Re:International coordination? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

    International cooperation, as in the International Space Station aka cluster fuck #1 ?
    No, if the US wants to go back in space it has all the means at its disposal. You just need a coherent political vision that doesn't change every day. Stop spending trillions of dollars in meaningless wars, in meaningless security state programs etc... Raise taxes, make americans feel proud of their country again and set your eyes on the moon and mars. One generation ought to be enough to send astronauts to mars, keep a fully inhabited moon base etc... And for god's sake, once you're there stay there. Don't dismantle yet again the space program once you achieve the goal. Its stupid that of all the apollo missions, only 3 were really scientific and only one carried a real scientist. Less pilots, more scientists in space.

  10. Nobody called Zubrin - by Darth+Snowshoe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  11. Re:International coordination? by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    The catering?

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  12. Too little too late (for me) by macraig · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:Too little too late (for me) by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      Transport 100,000 people to an off-world location of your choosing
      Make sure accommodations are built and ready for them
      Make them go from 100% to 0% dependent on earth for their survival within 100 years
      Explain who will pay for it, how, and why

      Oddly enough, when the Pilgrims went to Plymouth Rock, they took fewer than 100,000.

      Their accomodations weren't built and waiting for their arrival.

      And they didn't go from 100% to 0% dependent on Europe in 100 years, either.

      Personally, I'd settle for 50-100 people (roughly comparable in number to the Pilgrims) in my lifetime, and aim to make them independent on Earth within 300 years.

      And, of course, we make them independent on Earth in a sensible fashion - IC's are light, so it's not really all that important that they need to import them from Earth (as one example), but building houses/domes/whatever people live in is mass-intensive (and relatively simple), so it should have a high priority in the whole process of "becoming independent of Earth".

      Not, mind you, that there's any chance of that happening in my lifetime. Kennedy made his speech after I was born, and Armstrong took his "small step for a man" when I was 10. But it doesn't look like even the optimistic assumption for going back to the Moon involve periods within my lifetime, much less getting to Mars.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  13. cap in hand to the man by reiisi · · Score: 2

    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.
  14. It should be both asteroids and moon by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.