EPTNASA and the Private Sector - Page 20
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Keep debates civil. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Kaal
Djibouti2570 Posts
Then the countdown posts. And then. Abort. I'm sorry, but I laughed so hard. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Bowdz
United States202 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Bowdz
United States202 Posts
On May 19 2012 22:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: The mere fact they had actually an abort situation and handled it correctly makes me feel better about this. I don't mean because of the situation itself, but the fact that they were able to detect and mitigate any damage. Agreed. It's important to remember that their initial static fire test on April 29 had a similar abort situation as it halted countdown at 40 seconds for a non-issue with the parameters. It's irritating (because I am SO excited to see this mission get underway), but good to know that their abort systems are working as intended. | ||
|
Aylear
Norway3988 Posts
On May 19 2012 22:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: The mere fact they had actually an abort situation and handled it correctly makes me feel better about this. I don't mean because of the situation itself, but the fact that they were able to detect and mitigate any damage. Absolutely. This can be solved, launch is still imminent. Still completely excited for this. | ||
|
BillyJoe
Canada60 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Engineers replacing failed valve on engine #5 following today’s abort. Data review Sunday, if all looks good next attempt is Tues. May 22 at 3:44 AM ET | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
On May 20 2012 03:04 BillyJoe wrote: Nasa's entire 50 year life span's budget cost less than the bank bailout. Nasa's budget is only 1/4 of every penny in a tax dollar. Id say it was underfunded at the very start. This. Just imagine what science could do if they had even 1/10th of the yearly military budget of the world? I think its high time the aliens come to destroy our world so that the military have to spent their money on spaceships as well as better guns and bombs ;p P.S, going in to low orbit after goin to the moon is like Columbus sailing to the new world then spending the rest of his life in a rubber dingey going up and down the spanish coast lol. Can't wait until we can go somewhere new again, thats what we need before the world can get excited about space exploration again | ||
|
Blennd
United States266 Posts
On May 20 2012 11:50 emythrel wrote: This. Just imagine what science could do if they had even 1/10th of the yearly military budget of the world? I think its high time the aliens come to destroy our world so that the military have to spent their money on spaceships as well as better guns and bombs ;p P.S, going in to low orbit after goin to the moon is like Columbus sailing to the new world then spending the rest of his life in a rubber dingey going up and down the spanish coast lol. Can't wait until we can go somewhere new again, thats what we need before the world can get excited about space exploration again Space exploration is a very very cost-inefficient way to do science. | ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
On May 20 2012 11:50 emythrel wrote: This. Just imagine what science could do if they had even 1/10th of the yearly military budget of the world? I think its high time the aliens come to destroy our world so that the military have to spent their money on spaceships as well as better guns and bombs ;p P.S, going in to low orbit after goin to the moon is like Columbus sailing to the new world then spending the rest of his life in a rubber dingey going up and down the spanish coast lol. Can't wait until we can go somewhere new again, thats what we need before the world can get excited about space exploration again Wouldn't mind an avengers initiative and genius billionaire playboy philanthropists emerging and the whole shebang either  My physics teacher got extremely emotional and really teared up one day while on a tangent talking about space exploration and her watching the shuttle launches as a kid on a tiny TV...really an inspirational (even though we were supposed to be talking about relatively simple harmonic motion). Since then, though I've become very interested in space...looking forward to the may 22 launch  and yeah, the ability to detect that issue with the booster really legitimizes this particular private sector venture in my opinion. (in before conspiracy theories of them premeditating the delay and then blahblahblah hoax or something like that :X) | ||
|
Newbistic
China2912 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On May 20 2012 12:08 Newbistic wrote: It would be nice if the government could do for the private space exploration tech companies what they did for military contractors. No sentient species wants to be stuck on their native rock forever, right? No sane species would. | ||
|
Bowdz
United States202 Posts
On May 20 2012 03:04 BillyJoe wrote: Nasa's entire 50 year life span's budget cost less than the bank bailout. Nasa's budget is only 1/4 of every penny in a tax dollar. Id say it was underfunded at the very start. I want to preface this comment by stating that I completely agree with you (and Neil deGrasse Tyson) in that NASA's budget should be significantly higher than it currently is. With that said, I think there needs to be a very large paradigm shift in both Washington and the NASA administration heavily geared towards manned space travel before increasing the budget if the goal is to see a return to form from NASA (return to the Apollo era launch schedule and progression). Although I know that it is next to impossible, there needs to be something in place (either legislation or simply public awareness) that discourages Representatives from trying to manage the regional production of various projects through earmarks for their district. When the production of the Orion capsule is spread out across some 30+ states and parts constantly have to be shipped back and forth across the country to different subcontractors (when it would be much more efficient to keep it as localized as possible) it both drives the cost up precipitously and greatly slows down the project while also exposing the project to increased risks and unexpected delays. It is one of the many reasons the expected price of the Constellation program rose from $20 billion to roughly $38 billion when it was canned and why Orion has already cost $6 billion with an unmanned test flight scheduled some two years from now. It is also the reason the SLS was pieced together with multiple Senators trying to get as many jobs in their districts as possible. Not only is that no way to engineer a project, but it greatly increased the chances that it may end prematurely at the hands of a future President or Congress (due to cost overruns). Also, the lack of a firm vision not only from a single President, but continuing between administrations doesn't help projects in progress. As much as I dislike the cost plus contract type that Lockheed Martin continually wins, I feel sorry for the Orion development team considering the budget and mission goal of Orion has changed three times in some five years (from the Moon, to Mars, to and Asteroid). That is not good for efficiency or quality. I really have no idea about how (perhaps besides a change from the cost plus contracts to a milestone contract), but there should be more precautions taken so once projects have reached a certain state, they will be completed. Despite the incredibly poor management behind JWST, the fact that we could spend $3 billion on a partially constructed telescope and nearly have it be killed off is equivalent to throwing money away. I feel like a combination of the fixes above in addition to a less politicized appropriations committee would help better vet project designs initial and offset the risks of cost overflows. Finally, both the President AND Congress need to agree on a joint, concise, mission timeline and guide for NASA and make sure the direction of the agency is clear (i.e. we will land a manned mission on Mars by 2022 or we will establish a minor outpost on the Moon by 2017). Something that sets the tone of pace at NASA and that gives a solid narrative to engage the country in the progress. Once some degree of the above has been addressed, I think the budget of NASA needs to be significantly increased, but I doubt substantially increasing the budget in the current atmosphere would do much to further the manned space flight goals (although it would do wonders for the robotic missions that were recently cut). /rant | ||
|
Deleted User 124618
1142 Posts
| ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
So in the future with the help from the private space sector the NASA should focus on making scientific instruments embedded on private companies space probes. | ||
|
Catch]22
Sweden2683 Posts
On May 20 2012 17:25 Greentellon wrote: If private sector can make space technology profitable, it's a VERY good thing. Especially the space mining of asteroids Cameron & Co. wanted to do. It will lead to new advances in space technology, as they try to make things as cheap and effective as possible. Im really curious and skeptical about the possibility of private sector space industry being profitable... | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On May 21 2012 01:47 Catch]22 wrote: Im really curious and skeptical about the possibility of private sector space industry being profitable... It requires tourism. | ||
| ||
