NASA To Drastically Cut Mars Mission Funding

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA To Drastically Cut Mars Mission Funding

Posted by timothy on Saturday February 11, 2012 @02:31AM from the pick-a-new-genre dept.

DesScorp writes "Faced with budget cuts, and forced to choose between deep space observation or a mission to Mars, CBS reports that NASA will kill most of its Mars exploration programs. Sources in NASA say that of the $300 million being cut from the space agency's budget, two-thirds were for a joint US-EU program for Martian exploration. NASA spokesman David Weaver said that, just like the rest of the federal government, the space agency has to make 'tough choices and live within our means.'"

13 of 191 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Good lord. by breakspirit · 2012-02-11 02:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

We're never going to Mars at this rate. Well, America isn't at least. Good thing there are other, less short-sighted countries that will inevitably get there.
1. Re:Good lord. by networkBoy · 2012-02-11 04:11 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  If that's what it takes to convince the politicians to fund NASA instead of the DOD and entitlement programs, then sure, I'll play along.
  [/unzips]
  
  --
  whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
2. Re:Good lord. by fritsd · 2012-02-11 05:36 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  i've no idea about you, but if another country manages to get humans there before the US does, it would be a slap in the face of the US when it comes to technological competence.
  
  Naah.. speaking as a European, I think you shouldn't see it as "a slap in the face of the US when it comes to technological competence". It just means, that the cultural "focus" of the USA is not aimed at its own *technological* competence any more. You could if you wanted, but you don't want those kind of things anymore.
  
  From our perspective, it seems you're currently more aiming for euh... let's label it juridical competence and financial world supremacy.
  
  Hold a questionnaire amongst USA schoolkids, tally how many want to become astronauts or doctors, and how many lawyers / rich. I'm curious.
  
  --
  To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
3. Re:Good lord. by Artifakt · 2012-02-11 07:26 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Before you criticise national dick-waving contests, the usual form those take is called WAR . Space programs, high speed rail, big dams or just about any other ways of competing without applying communal skill at high energy physics just to deliberately kill people are much better alternatives.
  See, you don't get to say "I've got a really brilliant opinion if the lion will just lie down with the lamb first to make it not a stupid opinion.". Fix war, and then you can criticise anythng that at least subliminates the normally violent dick-waving, for still having a dick-waving element.
  
  --
  Who is John Cabal?
Sorry folks... by Average_Joe_Sixpack · 2012-02-11 02:45 · Score: 3, Insightful

The days of America's manned space program are over now that Medicare and Social Security are running deep into the red.
1. Re:Sorry folks... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-11 04:18 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  If you cut the income level, where does the money come from?
  The top tax rate in 1960 was 90%, now it is 35%. You need to pay and the Federal Government accomplished all of the great space goals like putting a man on the moon, building our highway system, and educating many.
  Check out the facts:http://tcftakingnote.typepad.com/.a/6a00e54ffb9698883301543328d90e970c-popup
  Medicare and Social Security are successful programs as well. You have plenty of opportunity to succeed in America and successful entrepnaures do not complain about the tax rate, they complain that we do not have enough skilled, educated workers to compete with other countries. Germany, which makes some great products has a higher tax rate than us and is still very competitive.
  Blaming the decline of the space program on Medicare and Social Security is far too simple.
2. Re:Sorry folks... by TC+Wilcox · 2012-02-11 04:41 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The days of America's manned space program are over now that Medicare and Social Security are running deep into the red.
  Not that I particularly like Medicare and Social Security, but I prefer both of those to our huge military build up and foreign wars.
We just lost the Mars. by jimmydigital · 2012-02-11 02:46 · Score: 4, Insightful

If only there were a bank on Mars that needed bailed out... by god then we would get there! I wonder if there is enough atmosphere on the red planet to fly a helicopter from which we could drop money.. or lacking the funds... turkeys.

--
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. -HLM
1.7% cut? by rubycodez · 2012-02-11 02:55 · Score: 5, Insightful

with 18 billion dollar budget you'd think there would be enough waste and nonsense to deal with that 300 million cut without cutting programs.
1. Re:1.7% cut? by networkBoy · 2012-02-11 04:24 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  There is, but I'll let you in on a little funding secret:
  If you adsorb the losses by being more efficient then no-one notices and you can't use that money as a last ditch buffer (we forgot we need this widget, tighten up the ship, so we can buy it out of our existing budget). If you instead cut something noticeable you "make them pay" for cutting your budget. Happened to our IT department where I work. They had a 5% cut to their budget so they cut a service that saved labs all around the world untold $$$ by being essentially an internal craigslist to connect surplus equipment with labs that needed the kit. it was run by two dedicated staff, that's it. The rest of the 5% cut near as I can tell was adsorbed, but they made sure everyone noticed that this service was cut due to the budget constraints.
  -nb
  
  --
  whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Managerial Incompetence by Lawrence_Bird · 2012-02-11 03:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

NASA is a bankrupt bureaucracy plain and simple. Instead of axing the funding (many billions) on space adventures for man (mars, moon, whatever) and 'heavy lift' vehicles they axe funding in the one area where one could say they have a legitimate role - pure scientific exploration. There are no good reasons to race to get men on Mars. And there is no reason any longer for NASA to be developing rockets when private industry can take over and perhaps profit now that the government funded competition is out of the way. Imagine taking just 25% of what is planned for manned missions and associated vehicles and applying it to basic exploration like voyager, cassini, etc. NASA would have more than enough funding to focus on the things they do best.
1. Re:Managerial Incompetence by flyingsquid · 2012-02-11 06:12 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  All of which could have been done cheaper with unmanned rockets.
  The only really significant thing the manned space program has done in 20 years is fix the Hubble. That was pretty awesome, and you couldn't have done that without a manned program. But according to the numbers on Wikipedia, building the Hubble cost around $2.5 billion, whereas the Shuttle program cost around $170 billion. For the cost of two shuttle missions you could have built a replacement Hubble.
  Astronauts are basically a PR stunt, a way of literally putting a human face- and in particular, an *American* face on space exploration. Putting a man on the moon was a PR stunt, a way to show off America's power. The Saturn V was a monument to the power of the United States in the same way that the pyramids were a monument to the dynasties of the Egyptian pharaohs. I'm not arguing that this kind of stuff is meaningless. On the contrary, it's really important. The space program is a form of soft power that compliments the aircraft carrier. The aircraft carrier projects power in the form of threat; the space program projects power in the form of inspiration. The aircraft carrier says we're more powerful than the other guys, the space program says that we're ultimately about something more than just brute force.
  Here's my argument: the manned program has outlived its usefulness as an instrument of soft power. When you're flying Lord British and the dude who developed Microsoft Word on the ISS, the manned space program has degenerated into a form of adventure tourism for the superrich. That doesn't inspire the nation, and it doesn't inspire the world. The unmanned program, however, continues to project what's best about the United States as a country- our ingenuity, our creativity, our daring, our need to explore, and our refusal to settle for second place. I'm not arguing we should give up on space- I'm saying we should double down on the unmanned program, because that's where the real exploration, inspiration, and science is all happening.
Re:So, how much do they spend on... by buddyglass · 2012-02-11 03:33 · Score: 4, Insightful

Illegal aliens can't take advantage of welfare, if by welfare you mean TANF. They pay property taxes, sales tax and the federal gas tax. Existing outside the federal income tax system they're also unable to take advantage of the EITC, which many would qualify for if they were filing federal returns.
I also like how you simultaneously complain about a lack of federal education spending and rail against the socialist nanny state. What do you think free, compulsory public education is?