NASA

[Novus America]

Look at the SLS fiasco, for one. $15 billion spent to date on a launch system that has inferior payload capacity vs. one designed over 50 years ago, which will maybe work 12 years after the project started, vs. the Saturn V which took 6 years using technology available in the early to mid 1960s.

The Apollo program was also immensely expensive.

It was. But unlike SLS it actually produced a real rocket.

Again I agree NASA is underfunded but underfunding is only a part of the problem.

I am okay with spending a lot on a project that works.
Not poorly designed vaporware.

[Vetalia]

The Apollo program was also immensely expensive.

True, but it also delivered one of the most incredible accomplishments in human history in the same 12-year span it will take the SLS to be remotely functional, and did so with a starting knowledge base of about 3 years of experience in space exploration and computer technology that at its best is orders of magnitude less than that in a run-of-the-mill laptop. The SLS started with over 50 years of experience in space exploration and vast advancements in technologies related to space exploration and has delivered absolutely nothing.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with funding NASA, if anything its budget should be substantially increased. We just need to get rid of the waste and corporate cronyism plaguing it and use its resources efficiently.

[Telconi]

The Apollo program was also immensely expensive.

True, but it also delivered one of the most incredible accomplishments in human history in the same 12-year span it will take the SLS to be remotely functional, and did so with a starting knowledge base of about 3 years of experience in space exploration and computer technology that at its best is orders of magnitude less than that in a run-of-the-mill laptop. The SLS started with over 50 years of experience in space exploration and vast advancements in technologies related to space exploration and has delivered absolutely nothing.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with funding NASA, if anything its budget should be substantially increased. We just need to get rid of the waste and corporate cronyism plaguing it and use its resources efficiently.

Sure, but they accomplished apollo on the backs of budgets easily double what we give them now. And it was their only focus. Even ignoring the 'corporate cronyism' NASA has tons on their plate that isn't SLS.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The Sith Lord is thrilled about living in the moon. I’m not. Of course, he has a space suit. Figures.

[Vetalia]

[
Sure, but they accomplished apollo on the backs of budgets easily double what we give them now. And it was their only focus. Even ignoring the 'corporate cronyism' NASA has tons on their plate that isn't SLS.

I'm not arguing that in the slightest, I would support increasing NASA's budget back to its Space Race levels without question; we're in a new Space Race now and it's much bigger and more critical to our country than the last one was. Cancelling the SLS would be a good start on reigning in waste at NASA but there also needs to be a more defined approach to its missions and strategy. I for one would like to see major investment in exploration of the Jovian moons for evidence of life and less focus on Mars; unless we have a plan to create an artificial magnetosphere for Mars, it's pretty much pointless to focus on it as a target for colonization.

[Novus America]

True, but it also delivered one of the most incredible accomplishments in human history in the same 12-year span it will take the SLS to be remotely functional, and did so with a starting knowledge base of about 3 years of experience in space exploration and computer technology that at its best is orders of magnitude less than that in a run-of-the-mill laptop. The SLS started with over 50 years of experience in space exploration and vast advancements in technologies related to space exploration and has delivered absolutely nothing.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with funding NASA, if anything its budget should be substantially increased. We just need to get rid of the waste and corporate cronyism plaguing it and use its resources efficiently.

Sure, but they accomplished apollo on the backs of budgets easily double what we give them now. And it was their only focus. Even ignoring the 'corporate cronyism' NASA has tons on their plate that isn't SLS.

Still the SLS was fundamentally flawed from the start.
It is a bad idea badly executed, well probably not executed at all.

I do agree NASA has too much going on, the mission creep needs to stop, and most programs axed so NASA can actually focus on a few key aerospace projects.

[Telconi]

Sure, but they accomplished apollo on the backs of budgets easily double what we give them now. And it was their only focus. Even ignoring the 'corporate cronyism' NASA has tons on their plate that isn't SLS.

Still the SLS was fundamentally flawed from the start.
It is a bad idea badly executed, well probably not executed at all.

I do agree NASA has too much going on, the mission creep needs to stop, and most programs axed so NASA can actually focus on a few key aerospace projects.

What specifically makes SLS bad?

[Vetalia]

What specifically makes SLS bad?

It has cost enormous amounts of time, money and resources to develop and is inferior in capabilities to rockets that existed 50 years ago and still doesn't work.

[Novus America]

Still the SLS was fundamentally flawed from the start.
It is a bad idea badly executed, well probably not executed at all.

I do agree NASA has too much going on, the mission creep needs to stop, and most programs axed so NASA can actually focus on a few key aerospace projects.

What specifically makes SLS bad?

That it is not reusable primarily.
Cheaper better rockets are available.

It simply recycles old obsolete technology rather than offering anything new.

Also despite the absurd amount of time and money it does not even exist and probably never will.

[Ethel mermania]

This would be awesome if NASA actually does it.
But cost overruns, mission creep, excessive risk adversion and countless delays will probably mean we never get there.

NASA is a pale shadow of what it was unfortunately.

It cannot even put a man in space anymore.

It has to contract it out. Right now to the Russians.
Soon to US private companies.
But if it cannot even put a man in orbit I see little hope for the moon.

NASA needs a complete restructuring and change of organizational culture. And that is not easy.

NASA needs funding, is what it needs. Not being able to put a man there? Because it's not funded properly and they didn't get another space vehicle in place before mothballing the shuttle fleet.

They get less than 0.5% of the budget of the US folks. That's why it's been castrated, and that's why the idiots in charge of the Federal Government are saying privatize, let Virgin Space or Elon Musk do it.

Why not? Why should the government spend the money? Private industry can do it faster and cheaper. Again the falcon heavy cost about 500 million to produce and it works., the SLS which has not launched yet is at 23 billion and counting.

[Northwest Slobovia]

NASA needs funding, is what it needs. Not being able to put a man there? Because it's not funded properly and they didn't get another space vehicle in place before mothballing the shuttle fleet.

The address for money is "Congress, Capitol Hill, Washington, DC".

They get less than 0.5% of the budget of the US folks.

True, but bad ideas, like "men on the moon because it's cool" aren't worth it at any cost.

that's why the idiots in charge of the Federal Government are saying privatize, let Virgin Space or Elon Musk do it.

Nah, the Congress and Obama administration recognized that private industry is capable of designing, building, and flying many kinds of missions faster, cheaper, and better than NASA can. As others have noted, that has little to do with money, and much to do with a hopelessly risk-averse, hidebound organizational culture.

[Ethel mermania]

NASA needs funding, is what it needs. Not being able to put a man there? Because it's not funded properly and they didn't get another space vehicle in place before mothballing the shuttle fleet.

The address for money is "Congress, Capitol Hill, Washington, DC".

They get less than 0.5% of the budget of the US folks.

True, but bad ideas, like "men on the moon because it's cool" aren't worth it at any cost.

that's why the idiots in charge of the Federal Government are saying privatize, let Virgin Space or Elon Musk do it.

Nah, the Congress and Obama administration recognized that private industry is capable of designing, building, and flying many kinds of missions faster, cheaper, and better than NASA can. As others have noted, that has little to do with money, and much to do with a hopelessly risk-averse, hidebound organizational culture.

Tbf to NASA. It's the government, by definition they have to be hidebound and risk adverse. The bid process has to be open, much more stringent records have to be kept to insure fraud doesnt take place, which both lengthens the process and increases the cost. they cant take the risks with human life or the possibility of failure private industry can afford to take.

NASA needed to lead the way when it was all science and those costs were prohibitive. It's mostly engineering now. Private industry can do it faster, cheaper and better.

[Vetalia]

Tbf to NASA. It's the government, by definition they have to be hidebound and risk adverse. The bid process has to be open, much more stringent records have to be kept to insure fraud doesnt take place, which both lengthens the process and increases the cost. they cant take the risks with human life or the possibility of failure private industry can afford to take.

NASA needed to lead the way when it was all science and those costs were prohibitive. It's mostly engineering now. Private industry can do it faster, cheaper and better.

Plus they mandated the use of Space Shuttle parts and let Boeing manage the development of the damn thing. Let's hope to God Boeing didn't stick their defective MCAS in the SLS like they did with the 787-MAX.

[Northwest Slobovia]

The address for money is "Congress, Capitol Hill, Washington, DC".


True, but bad ideas, like "men on the moon because it's cool" aren't worth it at any cost.


Nah, the Congress and Obama administration recognized that private industry is capable of designing, building, and flying many kinds of missions faster, cheaper, and better than NASA can. As others have noted, that has little to do with money, and much to do with a hopelessly risk-averse, hidebound organizational culture.

Tbf to NASA. It's the government, by definition they have to be hidebound and risk adverse.
Actually, they don't. That was one of the lessons of the Space Race and a fair number of scientific missions: novelty and risk are often good, if one understands the reasons why. Faget designed the earlier manned ships (with a lot of Grissom's input on Gemini) and they were bid out to many of the same aerospace companies that are now allowed to charge far too much and produce things of dubious value. All those ships were novel; it's not like we had any idea what would work until we tried. Further, the all-up tests of the Apollo stack were risky, but having decided to take the risk, NASA managed to build to that risk, and made the thing fly the first time.

The Voyager Grand Tour was (for the time) also novel and risky: it required a lot of things to go right, exactly on schedule. And NASA built to that risk by flying Voyager 1 on a simpler mission, with Voyager 2 getting the Grand Tour if Voyager 1 achieved all the primary science goals at Jupiter and Saturn.

[Novus America]

The address for money is "Congress, Capitol Hill, Washington, DC".


True, but bad ideas, like "men on the moon because it's cool" aren't worth it at any cost.


Nah, the Congress and Obama administration recognized that private industry is capable of designing, building, and flying many kinds of missions faster, cheaper, and better than NASA can. As others have noted, that has little to do with money, and much to do with a hopelessly risk-averse, hidebound organizational culture.

Tbf to NASA. It's the government, by definition they have to be hidebound and risk adverse. The bid process has to be open, much more stringent records have to be kept to insure fraud doesnt take place, which both lengthens the process and increases the cost. they cant take the risks with human life or the possibility of failure private industry can afford to take.

NASA needed to lead the way when it was all science and those costs were prohibitive. It's mostly engineering now. Private industry can do it faster, cheaper and better.

The thing is NASA used to be cutting edge, innovative and risk taking.
It had to be to compete in the space race.

If the NASA today was what we had in the 60s we never would go to the moon.
NASA changed and for the worse.

[Cloney]

Just waiting on SpaceX to colonize Mars, I will move there as soon as it is mostly safe so I don’t have to deal with nuclear war.

[Vetalia]

Just waiting on SpaceX to colonize Mars, I will move there as soon as it is mostly safe so I don’t have to deal with nuclear war.

Ironically, you're going to get more radiation than would ever be possible on Earth thanks to the solar wind and Mars' lack of a magnetosphere.

[Auze]

They should bring back the worm logo. It was lit af.

I mean, the style is already being used by the PBS series NOVA. I like the current NASA logo, anyway.

It's going to be a military base to deter the Space Pirates

Even a type III civilization could not hope to defend against the Space Sharks, however.

[Katganistan]

NASA needs funding, is what it needs. Not being able to put a man there? Because it's not funded properly and they didn't get another space vehicle in place before mothballing the shuttle fleet.

The address for money is "Congress, Capitol Hill, Washington, DC".

They get less than 0.5% of the budget of the US folks.

True, but bad ideas, like "men on the moon because it's cool" aren't worth it at any cost.

that's why the idiots in charge of the Federal Government are saying privatize, let Virgin Space or Elon Musk do it.

Nah, the Congress and Obama administration recognized that private industry is capable of designing, building, and flying many kinds of missions faster, cheaper, and better than NASA can. As others have noted, that has little to do with money, and much to do with a hopelessly risk-averse, hidebound organizational culture.

Well then, where ARE Virgin Galactic and Elon Musk? I mean, since they can do it better and cheaper.

I mean throwing a convertible into orbit is the definition of cool but ultimately useless....

Whereas we've had NASA send a rover to Mars (Opportunity) that lasted more than twice the lifetime of its twin (spirit) and sent back amazing data.....

[Vetalia]

They should bring back the worm logo. It was lit af.

No, straight 1950s logo or bust.

[Dooom35796821595]

The address for money is "Congress, Capitol Hill, Washington, DC".


True, but bad ideas, like "men on the moon because it's cool" aren't worth it at any cost.


Nah, the Congress and Obama administration recognized that private industry is capable of designing, building, and flying many kinds of missions faster, cheaper, and better than NASA can. As others have noted, that has little to do with money, and much to do with a hopelessly risk-averse, hidebound organizational culture.

Well then, where ARE Virgin Galactic and Elon Musk? I mean, since they can do it better and cheaper.

I mean throwing a convertible into orbit is the definition of cool but ultimately useless....

Whereas we've had NASA send a rover to Mars (Opportunity) that lasted more than twice the lifetime of its twin (spirit) and sent back amazing data.....

Isn’t It funny how it’s always the government agency that gets the blame, while the private companies get all the praise?

[Farnhamia]

Possibly relevant?

[Vetalia]

Possibly relevant?

Just wait until the spice melange is discovered on Mars.

[Farnhamia]

Possibly relevant?

Just wait until the spice melange is discovered on Mars.

Oy vey.

[Liriena]

Happy nerd noises

Pretty much my feelings. I'm a wanton slut for everything space related, and it's rekindling my optimistic expectations of the future.