Slashdot Mirror
Trump Administration Wants To End NASA Funding For ISS By 2025 (theverge.com)
According to budget documents seen by The Verge, the Trump administration is preparing to end support for the International Space Station program by 2025. As a result, American astronauts could be grounded on Earth for years with no destination in space until NASA develops new vehicles for its deep space travel plans. From the report: The draft may change before an official budget request is released on February 12th. However, two people familiar with the matter have confirmed to The Verge that the directive will be in the final proposal. We reached out to NASA for comment, but did not receive a response by the time of publication. Any budget proposal from the Trump administration will also be subject to scrutiny and approval by Congress. But even announcing the intention to cancel ISS funding could send a signal to NASA's international partners that the U.S. is no longer interested in continuing the program. Many of NASA's partners still have yet to decide if they'd like to continue working on the station beyond 2024. The International Space Station has been an ongoing program for more than two decades. It costs NASA between $3 to $4 billion each year, and represents a more than $87 billion investment from the U.S. government. It's become a major hub for conducting both government and commercial experiments in microgravity, as well as testing out how the human body responds to weightlessness.
Time to rename the Kibo module 'Zetsubou'.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
Something that is both cooperative and science based... I'm surprised Trump didn't nuke it on his first day in office!
If you want deep-space systems, it's best to have a place near Earth to test them.
Personally I'd rather see the money spent on unmanned missions and extra-solar planetary scopes: bigger science bang for the buck. BUT if we are going to have Mars-esque manned missions, ISS is a great place to test them out and train.
Table-ized A.I.
Donald Trump plans to BAN SUMMER. Someone saw the documents and told me so!
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...
Trump (and the people who voted for him) are driving the USA into the ground.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Something that is both cooperative and science based... I'm surprised Trump didn't nuke it on his first day in office!
Let's put partisan politics aside and take a walk down memory lane.
Those of us who are old enough to remember a time *before* the ISS can also remember the arguments against building it in the first place.
The ISS had no compelling reason to be built. It was nice and all, held some public relations appeal, and there were a few experiments that could be done on it, but in general it was not a good use of the money. People point to all the innovations and advancements we made due to going to the moon - and that's a fair assessment - but none of that happened at the ISS.
IIRC, it was mostly *scientists* who argued against building the ISS, and politicians who argued for it.
There are several potential projects that are far more interesting and more worthy, things such as exoplanet exploration rovers, landing on a comet, new and innovative space telescopes, and perhaps other space-based experiments such as laser interferometer gravitational detectors or telescopes based on photon quantum correlation.
Perhaps we should let scientists recommend where to spend the money.
Getting back to partisan identity emotionalism, it would seem that bringing an end to the ISS is more of a "common sense" decision than a "keep the dream alive" decision.
As well as framing this in disparaging emotionalism, you could just also call this decision "common sense".
Post made more sense when I read it as "end NASA funding for ISIS"
The ISS mission has exceeded it's original goals and it's far past time to recognize that. To say that it's invaluable to science is nonsense. To say that it is also invaluable to a human mars mission (something that I always thought was kind of stupid any way considering the countless failures we have had sending other spaceships there) is not much better than nonsense. This all has *got* to be a big open secret at NASA.
NASA can finally be unhindered to develope the next generation of propulsion technologies that will be required for any space mission rather than worry about what flavor of bubble gum a handful of Astronauts will need as they check off another orbit done.
I am truly glad that the Trump administration can see that.
Rather than a human mars mission, I much, much rather see us be able to find a way to send another spacecraft to Pluto and have it only need a year to get there.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
NASA has spent about $70 billion (2010 USD) on the ISS total. You can probably take that outta petty cash at the Pentagon.
The F-35 has cost 10 International Space Stations...
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
I assume the next US elections are 2020? Soon enough that hopefully the USA will put an adult in charge of things and need for the ISS will be weight up by someone with better qualified to determine the real merits of keeping it in operation.
Posting anonymously as I have better things to do with my life that listen to Trump supporters. Roll on the flamebait moderation, I know you can't resist using your moderation points to punish views your don't personally agree with...
The ISS was only designed with a 15 year life expectancy. It is currently about 18 years old (some modules are older, some newer), and by 2025 it'll be 25 years old. NASA figures the absolute deadline is 2028. So 2025 is a good retirement date if you want a safety margin. It's commensurate with a previous NASA study which green-lighted keeping it operational until 2024.
Discussion should be focused on what comes next. Not on how to keep the ISS flying. The Space Shuttle was retired for the same reason - its components were designed with only a max 30 year lifespan in mind. Retrofitting it for longer service would've involved replacing all these parts. And if you're going to do that, you might as well design something completely new that takes advantage of new technology that's been developed in the previous 20+ years.
AC the Rocket Scientists In Name Only are going to have to make a real rocket for the first time in a generation.
No more cheating by using very old Germans.
All the decades of party political appointees and social advancement will see a concerted effort to find the much needed private sector space contractors.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I expect that by 2025 we'll be close to the point where you can book a room in a private space station.
What you mean "we", white man? Are you one of the one percent who could afford it? I won't be going, and neither will most Slashdotters. When you get there, drink some champagne and then empty your bladder into your Gaultier space-suit's piss-tube, and think of us back on Earth, will ya?
"Musk's Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy will make launches cheap enough for that to be feasible."
Same thing they told us about the %$#@% Space Shuttle. They promised weekly launches and cost of a few hundred dollars a kg to LEO. The best they ever did was 9 launches in 1985. And the average cost to LEO was $60000/kg.
But this time it's different. ... How different? Most likely, not very
Aside from which, most of what we need to know about people, manufacturing, etc in space was determined in the 1970s by Skylab.
A new Skylab type mission every decade or two might be worth doing. The Space station was a near total waste of money and resources.
Humans in space? Maybe in the 22nd century. Right now, we'd do better to focus human exploration on great unknowns closer to home. Like the oceans that cover 70% of the planet. Leave exploring space to machines that can do it cheaper and better.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
... the "international" space station was mostly a political project and it is hard to cite any real success it had along those lines. It was about mending fences with the Russians after the Cold War by participating in a shared project that both nations could excel at... the Russians got funding to keep their space program alive without which it probably would have died entirely... and the US HOPED that the Russians would see the US as a potential friend in the world. Whatever our past... the future opens ever wider.
Sadly, it doesn't seem like any of that happened. The Russians seem immune to olive branch gestures.
That being the case... what is the scientific point of it? Nearly everything it does can be done more cheaply and creatively in other ways. We don't need to share funding or technology with what are still stubbornly rival powers. We are not chained to whatever is relevant to the ISS if we don't fund it at all.
The whole thing is likely to be abandoned and de-orbited.
I want humanity to venture into space... to claim the stars and all that stuff. But the ISS doesn't seem to have any role in that ambition. Its not even a good science platform. It isn't even good propaganda. It isn't even good diplomatic fodder to make the Russians happy. What does it do? Really?
I am very happy to fund NASA heavily. But clarify the mission statement and fund according to that clear mission.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
How? You got a nuke you've been hiding?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I think we all know the real reason that Trump is trying to kill off the ISS: He's a Nazi spy working for the 4th Reich who are waiting on the dark side of the moon for their chance to invade and the ISS is our best line of defence! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
ISS is too close to ISIS, and therefore, should not be funded.
BlameBillCosby.com
"Musk's Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy will make launches cheap enough for that to be feasible."
Same thing they told us about the %$#@% Space Shuttle. They promised weekly launches and cost of a few hundred dollars a kg to LEO. The best they ever did was 9 launches in 1985. And the average cost to LEO was $60000/kg.
But this time it's different. ... How different? Most likely, not very.
NASA budgets are fueled by taxpayer dollars. And taxpayers don't really see their taxes as an investment with returns, nor do they often raise their hand and volunteer to raise taxes by the billions in order to properly fund specific projects.
Compare and contrast that with Tesla, budgets are fueled by investors. And investors want to see revenue and returns, which require Musk to deliver. Is he on schedule? No, he has slipped, no doubt. But he has managed to innovate and deliver like no one else in the EV market, and reduce the cost of his product over the last 10 years to something that the average consumer can afford, not just the 1%.
Yes, I'd say this time is different. Moving space programs into the private sector is likely the solution to beating $60000/kg.
FYI:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Obama also announced an extension of funding for International Space Station operations, 90% complete by mass[15] at the time of the speech but scheduled to be deorbited by as early as 2015 before Obama announced the extension, which will provide funding through 2020."
I expect that by 2025 we'll be close to the point where you can book a room in a private space station
Hey Anonymous Coward - You honestly think that a mere seven years from now you'll be able to book a room at a hotel in space?
Are you on the moon already?
Fifty years from now, maybe.
I expect that by 2025 we'll be close to the point where you can book a room in a private space station.
What you mean "we", white man? Are you one of the one percent who could afford it? I won't be going, and neither will most Slashdotters.
Um, "Bitcoin".
Buy one today and you'll easily have enough money by 2025.
No sig today...
that's all!
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The Obama Administration signaled the end of support for the ISS back in 2014 when funding for only another 10 years was authorized. That's right, he wanted to end US financial support for the ISS by 2025. While it might be convenient to blame this on the Trump administration, continuing to fund a mission that is well past its life expectancy is a losing proposition. Amazing how readers get sucked into the narrative that news organizations want you to believe just by the inflammatory headlines.
"The value of the science done there..."
I have to say I haven't read anything recently that suggest they are doing any Science that is going to affect the greater society recently.
I am seriously interested in reading about what science they are doing that's worth all that money.
That said, I am ambivalent about the funding cut.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
About the only thing I can think of that ISS does do is give us data on long duration space health in preparation for a Mars mission. Don't we have enough of that?
And what are the chances of most Slashdotters going while the program is owned by NASA?
Yes, I'd say this time is different. Moving space programs into the private sector is likely the solution to beating $60000/kg.
In fact, SpaceX has already beaten that price by an order of magnitude. Even in expendable mode, the Falcon 9 only costs about $2500/kg to LEO; in reusable mode, they can probably shave another third off of that price. Falcon heavy can probably add another 25~50% savings on top of that (in reusable mode). But I'm afraid that's about all for the Falcon series, since they've abandoned 2nd-stage reusability in favor of the BFR approach.
Of course, once the BFR is flying, the cost of access to space will really drop. But even now, the GGP's notion of a private space station is already quite feasible. Bigelow Aerospace already has them ready to go, they're just waiting for a cheap taxi service to make the market. As long as the Russians are charging $70M a seat, there aren't a lot of potential customers, but if SpaceX can get you there for, say, $8M a seat... shit, the porn industry alone would be enough to fund multiple stations. ;-)
And that is all just around the corner. Both SpaceX and Boeing are on track for crewed test flights later this year.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
On the other hand if he was aboard now, I'd vote to deorbit the station immediately
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
He's not going to be president anymore by 2025, so how is it that he can even do that?
We've seen that it's entirely possible for one president to undo (at least some) decisions made by a previous one in the past.... what makes them sure that this would stick?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Zero-G Juggs.... Scruffy. The janitor.
A future to hope for.
Yep
People probably said the same thing about air travel in the 1950s. And in the 1970s it became common for everyday people. And in the 1990s it became uncommon to meet someone that hasn't traveled by air at some point if you live in an industrialized nation.
But good job staring at the metaphorical ground and never looking up at the horizon.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
If elections could change anything they would've been outlawed ages ago.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
As with the Space shuttle...it doesn't GO ANYWHERE. Oh, they might have some experiments and what not they do, but, it is still STUCK NOT DOING ANYTHING. EXPLORE outside of our planet, not circling the 3rd rock from the sun.
Not everything can be accomplished in 8 years. Should we never attempt long term projects because of that? Also there is the possibility that the next president/congress will agree with this decision, meaning that getting this ball rolling now would be good for their agenda.
The first missions to orbit and moon had important purposes - to see if humans can survive, to make science experiements in microgravity, to look for signs of life on moon, demostrate that Americans and Russians can cooperate without ripping each other's throats out and so on. But space is mostly... empty. Before we continue manned exploration, we need to decide WHY. Are we going to mine an asteroid for materials important on Earth? Will we be able to establish a permanent colony for people to develop as they wish? Is orbital tourism going to become practical? Until then - no hurry. Robotic missions are much cheaper/safer and suffice for most purposes. We could not even dream of having a human take high resolution photos of pluto. Maybe one day we will all be robots.
This funding "cut" was exactly the plan put forth by NASA.. When I read the ISS long term plans, 2025 was considered the end of the ISS's probable service life and the point where it was going to be time to start replacing a large portion of it for safety reasons.
Of course, we could leave it up there and let it degrade into a death trap like Mir did before the Russians even admitted it was time to move on.
The only thing I would change here is that before we leave, we take the parts of the station we paid for and deorbit them... Or if the Russians want to cough up some rubbles, we could sell some stuff to them and use the proceeds to work on the next project.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Tell that to the homeless white guy. Tell that to the white farmers in Africa. Tell that to the French in Haiti in 1791. Tell that to the white slaves throughout history.
Now they start to get a little push back and they act like they're the ones being oppressed.
Because revenge is not the same is equal opportunity.
Most white people wouldn't last a month as a black person in the US.
You have never been to a trailer park, have you?
You are a piece of shit that dresses up their racism in feel-good-progressive double speak like "privilege" to make you feel moral about your bigotry and hatred.
Yeah, except the numbers are actually there for Falcon 9 Heavy (if it works - we'll know more next week). http://www.nss.org/articles/fa...
1/4 the launch cost of a Delta IV Heavy while boosting over 2x the payload weight. Delta IV Heavy costs about an order of magnitue more per pound of payload.
Sounds like progress to me (if it works).
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
"the Falcon 9 only costs about $2500/kg to LEO"
As far as I can tell, it's $2500 per pound, (0.45 kg) not $2500 per kg) kilogram. That's roughly $5000 per kg. That's comparable with other launch systems. Probably a bit less if you can figure out how to compare as fairly as possible.
It's reasonable to expect some improvement over time.
Launch costs are pretty hazy for a lot of reasons. Wikipedia took them out of its tables five or six years ago, but you can dig the old version out of the Internet Archive if you really wish to. Best guess I could work out from what was there is that we'll probably hit affordable ($200/kg) around 2070 or 2080. And cheap enough to really do stuff without being crippled by launch costs ($20/kg) early in the next century.
Pessimistic? I suppose so. OTOH, it's been just about 50 years since Apollo and we've gone through two comparably costly (in current dollars) efforts -- the Space Shuttle and the ISS. We can still just barely get a few folks (safely) to orbit and back. I can't see why -- other than wishful thinking -- anyone thinks that situation is going to change any time soon.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Some would say this is a display of media bias... Or as Trump says "FAKE NEWS". In this case, he may have a point.
The Reality is that NASA's plans included ending the ISS in 2025, before the thing became a death trap. So the idea that Trump somehow is axing the budget for the ISS is not exactly true. My guess is that the president's budget is just matching NASA's funding request for the ISS and doesn't represent the President actively terminating the program.
So what is this story really about? It's an attempt to keep the program alive by appealing to the public, in this case targeted towards the left who are pre-loaded to dislike anything Trump does, good or bad. Where I don't like the method being used, I think funding the ISS past 2025 might be a good thing. However, we all need to realize that the ISS is rapidly exceeding it's design life and the dangers a life threatening malfunction in the harsh environment of low earth orbit are rising rapidly. We don't want to kill anybody here, so it might be time to pull the plug.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Their vote is basically a capitulation to a system that doesn't offer much choice.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
ULA even beats the GP post's price handsomely with both Delta IV Heavy ($14000/kg) and Atlas V ($8200/kg) to LEO if you put as much payload on there as it's rated for. The only reason to use Delta IV Heavy is if you have a big single payload that won't work on anything else, or you are leaving Earth orbit with something that weighs as much as 5 average sedans.
Even Saturn V, fully loaded, and adjusted for inflation, would be $3750/kg to LEO. Even the most expensive shuttle launch ever at $1.5B would have cost $54500/kg to LEO if fully loaded. Average Shuttle launch cost according to NASA was $450M, which puts the fully loaded cost at $18350/kg.
I'm not really sure what he's on about with $60k/kg to LEO, that's never been the case.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Have gnu, will travel.
Let me guess, equal outcome is what you think is equal opportunity? No equal opportunity yet, the most powerful man alive was a black man.
What law needs to be changed? What position can a black man not get? What money can a black man not earn? What education can a black man not achieve? Are you one of those idiots that think a spoiled son of a millionaire screaming "we have nothing to lose but our chains" is less privileged than the son of poor trailer park trash?
Oh it's "society" ingrained unconscious racism, amirite? If that is true then you can explain why the black community was getting better educated with better job prospects and stronger families under Jim Crow i.e. literal ingrained conscious societal racism. I don't think any idiot can say with a straight face that we are more racist as a society today compared to the 50's and 60's yet something happened and the black community is struggling more so now than when there were structural racial obstacles.
You are a piece of shit that dresses up their racism in feel-good progressive double speak like "privilege" to make you feel moral about your bigotry and hatred.
I'm just going by public info on price per vehicle ($62M) and capacity to LEO (22,800kg) which works out to $2,719/kg (I "guesstimated" $2,500 above, but used a calculator this time).
50 years since Apollo and we've gone through two comparably costly (in current dollars) efforts -- the Space Shuttle and the ISS. We can still just barely get a few folks (safely) to orbit and back. I can't see why -- other than wishful thinking -- anyone thinks that situation is going to change any time soon.
Well... assuming SpaceX can get the Dragon 2 capsule approved for human flight in the next year or so, would that not satisfy your criteria? I suppose it's still only launching "a few folks" at a time, but at a huge cost savings compared to what the Russians are charging.
If you're just talking about NASA spending, that's one thing. But the point of this whole thread is that private industry can do it better and cheaper. That has clearly been happening in recent years, and not just at SpaceX (they're just the most "visible" in the media).
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
heh, whenever I see a Lone Ranger reference I am reminded of Airheads.
I love space and I'm pretty much rather see a buck spent on that than on many other things. But I'm on the fence with this one. I love the ideal of having a permanent outpost in space but I'm just not seeing what this gets us. I know there is some research going on but I don't see that being worth what we are paying.
Instead of us putting in any more money into this tinkertoy collection in space, I would rather see us getting back to Warnher von Braun ideal of a space habitat.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
All of which proved to be without supporting evidence of any kind.
Actually, this is a great idea: NASA should start accepting Bitcoin for visits to the ISS! Not only will it be a great revenue stream for NASA, but it will help the IRS figure out who's been neglecting to put a few million dollars worth of crypto mining profits on their 1040 forms.
And, hey... if the Winklevoss twins ever show up, maybe Mark Zuckerberg will pay NASA extra to stage an unfortunate airlock depressurization "accident" for them.
I wonder what the maximum amount of Bitcoin BitPay currently accepts... it might need to be tweaked a bit.
This isn't the Slashdot I remember.
Am I the only one willing to commit a large chunk of my income in the form of taxes to subsidize wasteful (or otherwise) space projects?
Like, let's build 5 space stations, and bombard the moon and Mars with rockets until we acheive perfection?
It seems like space exploration is one of the few useful things we can do with humanity's wealth at this point in time.
Nasa's budget should be more like 10% of tax revenue. The military should be more like 1%.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
Is there intrinsic training value in having an ongoing maintenance project? Ex: Suppose you run the military. But there's no wars right now. But you know you need the best most experienced soldiers in your army. So you send soldiers on humanitarian missions, fighters on reconnaissance missions, subs to follow friendly craft, and run support missions against a small band of local outlaws. All this keeps your people in shape. Is there a similar value with NASA? Perhaps you would want to run missions to the ISS to keep the launch sites ready, add new modules to the ISS and do periodic repairs so that new engineers learn the best practices of the department. It is hard to put a dollar amount to that. I know that in engineering, you rarely want to hire a bunch of new employees to start a new project. You put them on maintenance projects first, then graduate them up to new development. Maybe the same applies to NASA?
Paint it gold and rename it "Trump Station" - he'll either fund it forever or refuse to pay the workers and declare bankruptcy. :-) It's really a coin toss at this point.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The Russians also offer reentry and return for that $70 million, as long as you think people are expendable.
Ken
n/t
The question is not, does this white person have a hard life? The question is, would this white person be worse off if he or she were of another race?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
This is the equivalent of saying, in 1957, that air travel would be for everyday people in 1965, only more so. Disregarding the differences between air travel and space travel, 2025 is ludicrously soon.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Nice try.
Total failure, since you have no metrics
but nice try
After two decades it is time to retire the prototype platform for work in space. The ISS did its job as a prototype for living environments in orbit and for interstellar long duration voyages. It is time to build a real working model.
NRRPT/RCT
> Most white people wouldn't last a month as a black person in the US.
Would not care to. I have to compete with other 'white' people. It is tough. Some people can lay back and blame whatever and vote for the Santa Clause political party. Not me. I have to bust my ass to even place.