Slashdot Mirror
Trump Offered NASA Unlimited Funding To Put People on Mars by 2020, Report Says (nymag.com)
From a report, based on a book by Cliff Sims, who worked as a communications official for Trump on his presidential campaign and in the West Wing: As the clock ticked down, Trump "suddenly turned toward the NASA administrator." He asked: "What's our plan for Mars?" Lightfoot explained to the president -- who, again, had recently signed a bill containing a plan for Mars -- that NASA planned to send a rover to Mars in 2020 and, by the 2030s, would attempt a manned spaceflight. "Trump bristled," according to Sims. He asked, "But is there any way we could do it by the end of my first term?"
Sims described the uncomfortable exchange that followed the question, with Lightfoot shifting and placing his hand on his chin, hesitating politely and attempting to let Trump down easily, emphasizing the logistical challenges involving "distance, fuel capacity, etc. Also the fact that we hadn't landed an American anywhere remotely close to Mars ever." Sims himself was "getting antsy" by this point. With a number of points left to go over with the president, "all I could think about was that we had to be on camera in three minutes .. And yet we're in here casually chatting about shaving a full decade off NASA's timetable for sending a manned flight to Mars. And seemingly out of nowhere."
Sims described the uncomfortable exchange that followed the question, with Lightfoot shifting and placing his hand on his chin, hesitating politely and attempting to let Trump down easily, emphasizing the logistical challenges involving "distance, fuel capacity, etc. Also the fact that we hadn't landed an American anywhere remotely close to Mars ever." Sims himself was "getting antsy" by this point. With a number of points left to go over with the president, "all I could think about was that we had to be on camera in three minutes .. And yet we're in here casually chatting about shaving a full decade off NASA's timetable for sending a manned flight to Mars. And seemingly out of nowhere."
...that he reminds me of Verruca Salt - "I want it NOW!"
This sig left unintentionally blank.
Sounds like someone is not used to having a boss. Managers ask unknowingly ridiculous things all the time. It is called having a job.
J
We could absolutely put people on Mars by 2020.
But if you want them to be alive when they get there, it'll take a bit longer.
Trump's one of those "businessmen" who think two women can bring a baby to term in 4 1/2 months.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
..he would have said "No, Mr President we can't get it done for 2020 but we can get it done for the end of your second term if you start the funding right now.!
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Well he could try the same tactic: Explicitly lay out a plan on how the Martians will pay for it, and then act like he never did so and shut down the government until taxpayers pay for it (or more likely, until he gets bored, or people get so tired of his BS that they're ready for a political impeachment).
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I imagine he was rather disappointed with where our space program is at the moment though. Can't say as I blame him.
It'll happen eventually though.
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
Also, constitutionally he doesn't have the rights to do this. This is why there is a government shutdown right now. He wants to pay for the wall, an other part of the government doesn't. The House of Representatives has the power of the purse strings, so they will not fund this wall. So the president will not approve any budget without such funding.
If he had the ability to unlimited fund NASA, why doesn't he have the ability to fund for his wall.
Also of note even with unlimited funding, putting a Man on Mars by 2020 is impossible. To perform such a project new technologies need to be made and the mythical man month is in play. There is only so much the everyone can do at once until they start stepping on each others feet.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
If he asked the same question of Elon Musk, he would have had a yes. Of course, Elon has a long track record of missing deadlines, but if SpaceX didn't have to use profits from regular launches to fund their Starship program, they could probably move it forward faster.
And if any Democrat President had offered unlimited funding to get a human mars landing in 4 years we'd be applauding the progressive actions to move technology and human progress forward.
Or have we forgotten that Obama shut down the space program altogether?
Nice troll.
TL/DR? Okay, here you go:
The Space Shuttle program was extended several times beyond its originally envisioned 15-year life span because of the delays in building the United States space station in low Earth orbit—a project which eventually evolved into the International Space Station. It was formally scheduled for mandatory retirement in 2010 in accord with the directives President George W. Bush issued on January 14, 2004 in his Vision for Space Exploration.[
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
and maybe Mitch McConnell? Asking for a friend.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I can't begin to describe how immensely sad this makes me at so many levels. At what point did the techies become such losers? I can remember a time, when we would examine the seemingly impossible, buck up, and meet the challenge. We have by no means met the edge of technology or solved all the problems we can solve. Like so much in life, it comes down to will, and you guys are a a complete bunch of pussies.
I want you to think about this. Really, truly, deeply think about this, and opportunity that was just lost. The space program has by and large been stalled. There is constant talk of going somewhere or doing something, sometime, which always seems to be 20 years away. Bureaucrats have been hired, who are more interested in job security than achieving. We have had a series of presidents, both republican and democrat, who have half assed the space program. We have lacked drive. We have lacked purpose. Now, an increasing number of people are losing interest that there is talk of far reducing funding or cancelling altogether. Why chase dreams when we can pay for more mundane practical stuff. It IS a good question.
So, along comes trump. You (likely) live in California, so you reflexively hate him, no matter what he says or does. So, when he asks if you want to chase your so called dreams, for real, you withered in the moment and said no. You disgust me. You should disgust yourself, and anyone else who loves epic science. The bell was rung, and you CHOSE to be tone deaf.
When Kennedy similarly rang the bell, better men than you rose and answered it. A whole host of knew technologies needed to be developed, but they new at its core, the moon shot was possible. Mars is the same. There are some issues to be solved, but they are not infinite. If Elon Musk offered a blank check for materials to have the best and brightest to work on this, you would faun over him, and maybe even be involved. But no, since you are small and petty, you mock and deride the effort because it was Trump.
You can say the timing was bad. You can claim it was unfair. But anyone who has ever chased a dream knows, you have to have your elevator speech ready. You never know who you bump into to make it happen. Instead of being snarky at Trump, you should save your Ire for the fucking NASA admin who was not prepared. He was asked, and he was not ready. Pathetic.
This was a moment in history lost. This was a moment for serious people with serious dreams. Instead, we got you. Instead of galvanizing expertise to figure out ways to meet the challenge, we will continue to support the nowhere scientists making nowhere plans for nobody. We will hand-wring and bitch that there is not money to test out solutions, since it is more fun to hand-wring and bitch than to actually tackle the problem. Again, you disgust me.
It's also a leadership methodology used by very experienced leaders. Of people involved in space programs, Korolev comes to mind. Get your engineering team, and then ask them to do the impossible. Offer them infinite support. Listen to them tell you it's impossible anyway. Ask for timetable with infinite resources.
You will very quickly see which engineers are good at their job, as they'll start thinking in ways they haven't thought when they were focused on getting budgetary acceptance. And that's how Korolev got Soviet space program to crush US one early on, and that's how US space program put the man on the moon first after Korolev died. You plant the necessary ideas in engineers' heads, then you take off the constraints and then you see which ones flake out because they can't handle it. Korolev was famous for even literally dumping all rocket scientists when they would tell him the project he proposed is impossible and go head hunting in other fields for talent that wouldn't be locked into preconceptions. That's how the engines that Lockheed Martin people flat out claimed to be impossible to make in 2000s were made in 1970s.
In this case, this report suggests that these two men flaked out. They couldn't start thinking beyond budget constraints and start thinking outside the familiar box when it was called for. Which is understandable, as NASA has been criminally underfunded for last two decades, to the point where if you aren't someone who's primary talent is in "meeting the budgetary needs", you probably quit long ago or were let go.
There is no scientific reason to send people to Mars. It is a political stunt.
I don't think any disagrees that it is a political stunt but so was the initial moon landing. There was no scientific reason to send people to the moon. Yet, that helped spur technological and scientific advancement. I think the same could happen with a manned mission to Mars. Is it worth it? I don't know.
Agree with the debt.
There's "impossible" that becomes possible when enough time and money is thrown at it and then there's impossible that is actually impossible. If you promise all the resources in the world to someone and they still say it's not possible, it doesn't mean they're bad at their job. It might just mean that it's actually impossible. If you promised me the entire world's resources devoted to sending a person back in time, I'd tell you it's impossible. Even if the entire world stopped what it was doing and devoted itself to this one task, we wouldn't be able to do it. I know that's an extreme example, but some things truly are impossible. Even if we gave NASA an unlimited budget, they couldn't safely send a man to Mars by 2020.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Or just a Tesla. They can launch a Tesla into space with four space suited astronauts (two in the front, two in the back.) Easy-peasy.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
When the NASA guy tried to patiently explain why it would be 2030 when NASA was there, Trump should have responded with:
"Well SpaceX says they'll be landing people there in 2025, why is NASA so slow? Maybe I should just send more government money to SpaceX. Why do you think you deserve it instead?"
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
RTFA. The question was asked almost two years ago.
And if you get past your derangement, it's a reasonable way to prod a bureaucrat into thinking big.
If only he could get the stupid Mongorians to stop breaking down his shitty wall.
They have not yet solved the problem of humans surviving several months of radiation in space yet -- I'd call that a "new technology that needs to be made", although I suppose 100 tons of lead shielding would probably do the job...
Actually it's not that bad. Current estimates are that a Mars round trip will take about 60% of an astronaut's career limit and that below 16 feet of Martian soil radiation will be Earth level. With a reasonable surface budget you're straddling the career limits, but note that they mean +3% chance of dying from cancer, it's not like a lethal dose or anything. The biggest dynamic is solar flares which are fairly low power and also directional so possible to shield against. Most think there'll be an emergency shelter inside the water tank, because water is quite effective at those energy levels. There's also the galactic cosmic rays (GCRs) that you can't shield much against, but they aren't a blocker for an exploration mission. They'd make it really hard to make any kind of permanent settlement though.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
How about we send Trump himself?
How is this different than any other business? A CTO with a million things on their plate may come to you and ask if you can speed up SAP deployment to a year.
It's a good question.
It's not a good question if you're about to give a presentation about the current deployment plan in 3 minutes and the CTO is suddenly acting pissed off and now wants it done before his contract re-negotiation.
1) If the CTO cared that much they could have asked the question before the big presentation.
2) The SAP deployment is for the company, not to pad the CTO's resume
3) It's your big moment, giving the presentation on all your hard work. Now the CTO is pissed off at you for no good reason and you're thinking about their unreasonable request.
You know I once saw a brilliant person taste a paint chip because they were curious about the taste.
Therefore if Trump starts eating paint he must be brilliant also!!!
I stole this Sig