space.newscientist.com — Deciding the fate of the shuttle is particularly time-sensitive. If the government decides to fly more shuttle missions, it could impact how quickly NASA can move forward with a shuttle replacement, set to be ready to fly by March 2015.
Nov 7, 2008 View in Crawl 4
utnowNov 7, 2008
You're exactly right, but because it looks like the apollo era capsules, it's going to get the 'old tech' label.The part they're missing is that it's the best tool for the job, and it's a known quantity that can be easily (read: cheaply) expanded on and developed.
getbusylivingNov 7, 2008
Obama will be the first man on Mars. Just you wait and see.
akeldamaNov 7, 2008
Name one private enterprise that has put a single person in orbit, just orbit. Now, how about landing on the moon or Mars? I'm not saying private enterprise can't do it, just that to say any current private enterprise is equal to or better than Nasa at the current moment is ludicrous. Furthermore, Nasa already has a plan in place and equipment in development. Why not continue the paltry funding already being supplied and see the missions through?If the Constellation program is killed, where do you think the Astronauts and engineers will go? Do you really think they'll all sit on the asses for five years in the off chance that the program gets revived?
designerutahNov 7, 2008
You're right about NASA not being necessary to launch communication or weather satellites. That should be private. Money is there to research, develop, and pay for this. But don't cut NASA's budget. Instead, use the money to do things where the return on investment is too far out to be considered. Like mining asteroids. Setting up MARS. An FTL drive. NASA should be our high-tech lab for projects that are too big, too far reaching, and too important to leave to industry. Industry is great at taking existing technology and improving it, making it profitable, etc. Even paying for related discoveries. But it takes military spending or a space agency to do some of the research because the ROI is too distant, too chancy, or is difficult to see where money can be made versus it being good for the people (like climate change!).
worldnickNov 7, 2008
The U.S. is also a leading expert on predatory marketing such as selling things to people who don't necessarily need or want them. The great warrior in the business suit who goes out and takes money from other people's hopes and insecurities. I personally think we should move away from that image. Hollywood is also an expert on image marketing. If that become our main staple I wouldn't be surprised if we just start selling white girls to other countries.
andrwmorphNov 7, 2008
That isn't stopping the Japanese from trying:In 2008 the book "Leaving the Planet by Space Elevator", by Dr. Brad Edwards and Philip Ragan, was published in Japanese and entered the Japanese best seller list.[29] This has led to a Japanese announcement of intent to build a Space Elevator at a projected price tag of £5 billion. In a report by Leo Lewis, Tokyo correspondent of The Times newspaper in England, plans by Shuichi Ono, chairman of the Japan Space Elevator Association, are unveiled. Lewis says: "Japan is increasingly confident that its sprawling academic and industrial base can solve those [construction] issues, and has even put the astonishingly low price tag of a trillion yen (£5 billion) on building the elevator. Japan is renowned as a global leader in the precision engineering and high-quality material production without which the idea could never be possible."[28]Also:Carbon nanotubes' theoretical tensile strength has been estimated between 140 and 177 GPa (depending on plane shape),[31] and its observed tensile strength has been variously measured from 63 to 150 GPa, close to the requirements for space elevator structures.[31][32] Nihon University professor engineering Yoshio Aoki, the director of the Japan Space Elevator Association, has stated that the cable would need to be four times stronger than what is the strongest carbon nanotube fiber as of 2008, or about 180 times stronger than steel.[28] Even the strongest fiber made of nanotubes is likely to have notably less strength than its components.HAIL WIKIPEDIA!
rambleNov 7, 2008
Flying pyramid spaceship? You mean the goa'uld?
bigmanoncampusNov 8, 2008
The government paid for that research, the government can take all the results to another vendor and say, "pick up where these people left off."... that's catastrophic, yes, but not as bad as simply abandoning all that work.
falldogNov 8, 2008
I'd rather see NASA become more fiscally responsible first.
sail4life8Nov 9, 2008
To the moon and beyond, NASA has always been on the leading edge of innovation. We should give them the ability to continue this and push it to new limits.