American Manned Trip to the Moon Cut

[HuskyCaucasian]

Obama Gives NASA More Money, Cuts Manned Trip to Moon

The Obama administration has officially decided to end the Constellation mission back to the moon, although the replacement plan faces a tough route through Congress.

 

The new plan, which had been rumored for months, was announced today with the release of the Obama administration’s NASA budget request, which despite the axing of the moon plan delivers a $6 billion funding increase over the next five years.

 

“NASA’s Constellation program — based largely on existing technologies — was begun to realize a vision of returning astronauts back to the Moon by 2020. However, the program was over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation due to a failure to invest in critical new technologies,” the budget summary concluded. “Using a broad range of criteria, an independent review panel determined that even if fully funded, NASA’s program to repeat many of the achievements of the Apollo era, 50 years later, was the least attractive approach to space exploration as compared to potential alternatives.”

 

As anticipated, the independent Augustine Panel’s work was used as the basis for the new NASA direction. Though the blue-ribbon panel did not officially take a position on which future plan made the most sense for NASA, statements made by members and the tone of their report made it clear that a continuation of the Constellation mission was not the group’s favored choice.

 

Constellation had been heavily criticized since it was unveiled in 2005 by President George W. Bush. Even before the plan was announced, some scientists pointed out that manned exploration has drawbacks, such as high costs, extreme safety requirements, and humans’ biological sensitivity to radiation. Scientists such as Ronald Arkin of the Mobile Robot Laboratory asked whether robots could do exploration better. The high-profile success of the Mars Rovers, Cassini, and Mars Phoenix mission suggested that robotic exploration was viable, at the very least.

 

Even among those who supported blasting humans out of the atmosphere, the details of the Constellation program were subject to attack. Many criticized the Bush administration for not providing enough money to back its grand Vision for Space Exploration.

 

In commenting on the Augustine report, David Mindell, a science and technology historian at MIT, called it, approvingly, “an utter rejection of the Bush plan because it’s unfundable, unbuildable and dangerous. ”

 

NASA administrator Charles Bolden made measured statements, ultimately noting that regardless of Constellation’s merits, it was not going to put humans back on the moon as envisioned.

 

“We were not on a sustainable path back to the moon’s surface,” Bolden said.

.....

“The President’s proposed NASA budget begins the death march for the future of U.S. human space flight. The cancellation of the Constellation program and the end of human space flight does represent change — but it is certainly not the change I believe in,” Shelby wrote in a statement. “Congress cannot and will not sit back and watch the reckless abandonment of sound principles, a proven track record, a steady path to success, and the destruction of our human space flight program.”

 

Thoughts?

 

My impression over the last few years was that the Constellation program was a complete disaster.

[Jenksismyhero]

Obama hates science.

[Balta1701]

My impression over the last few years was that the Constellation program was a complete disaster.

The idea that a permanent moon base was a path to Mars was ludicrous from the start.

[Soxy]

Eh, the mane was getting too long anyway.

[NorthSideSox72]

Manned mission to the moon sounds cool, but we just can't afford it right now. Its that simple, to me.

 

[Kyyle23]

They do need to trim that mane around the neck a little bit, I agree Soxy.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Eh, the mane was getting too long anyway.

Can someone fix my thread title. I completely missed an n. Thanks for catching that

[Balta1701]

Can someone fix my thread title. I completely missed an n. Thanks for catching that

Its funnier to not fix it.

[GoSox05]

Does this mean we aren't going to Mars anytime soon? I think we should go to Mars.

[Balta1701]

Does this mean we aren't going to Mars anytime soon? I think we should go to Mars.

Depending on how you define "We", we're already there.

 

 

The real problem is getting there with people, and keeping them alive. The latter part is really, really hard.

[bmags]

balta and his science comics

[HuskyCaucasian]

NASA Plans Manned Missions To Mars

Obama's proposed cancellation of Constellation moon program means more money for research into deep space travel, NASA chief says.

 

Defending a budget that effectively cancels a program that would have returned humans to the moon by 2020, NASA's top official said the space agency is looking beyond the lunar surface—to Mars.

 

In a statement, NASA administrator Charlie Bolden noted that the $3.8 trillion federal budget proposal handed down earlier this week by President Obama provides $3 billion over five years in funds "for robotic exploration precursor missions that will pave the way for human exploration of the moon, Mars, and nearby asteroids."

 

Bolden also noted that the President's budget actually increases total funding for NASA by $6 billion over the next half-decade.

 

Still, some lawmakers panned the administration's proposed cancellation of the Constellation moon program . They also rebuked the president for recommending NASA nix construction of the Ares and Orion space vehicles and turn launches over to private contractors.

 

"The president's proposed NASA budget begins the death march for the future of US human space flight," said Senator Richard Shelby (R-Ala), in a statement.

 

Shelby also characterized private space contractors as "hobbyists" that lack a track record when it comes to successfully and safely launching space vehicles carrying humans.

 

Wait, did a republican just say prioritization is a BAD idea???

[southsider2k5]

America's commitment to space hasn't been the same since the Challenger exploded. We have been going down the road to put NASA in the grave for quite a while now.

[BigSqwert]

NASA Plans Manned Missions To Mars

 

 

Wait, did a republican just say prioritization is a BAD idea???

 

 

Don't you get it? Don't have a huge budget, don't cut anything out of your budget, and cut taxes across the board. It's a fool proof way to have a bustling economy.

[HuskyCaucasian]

It still astonishes me that NASA was committed to an Apollo style take off system. It never made sense to me. They would waste so much stuff. Why not just just a single stage to orbit vehicle? Maybe something light weight to get the crew into space and an Apollo style take off system for heavy parts.

 

Heck, they could have just modernized the existing Shuttle design. Not retrofitting, just start from scratch but keep the same basic idea with modern electronics.

[southsider2k5]

Yeah, the biggest problems with the shuttle program is that most everything is of 1970's design. I don't know that you could do much with it, without starting over.

[Balta1701]

Yeah, the biggest problems with the shuttle program is that most everything is of 1970's design. I don't know that you could do much with it, without starting over.

Just as with most large engineering projects, once you shut the construction down, you really can't rebuild it. You keep enough industry online to continue to produce the necessary spare parts, but you don't have the ability to gear up to do a total refit.

 

The reason for getting rid of the shuttle is how unsafe and cost-ineffective it turned out to be as a resuable vehicle anyway.