Obama's new direction for NASA

[Gordon Freynman]

Obama has just laid out his plans for the future with NASA at the Kennedy Space Center moments ago and it goes something like this:

1) Constellation program to return to the Moon is scrapped (good riddance). Old news however.

2) The Orion Capsule from Constellation will be redesigned to serve as an escape pod for the International Space Station.

3) 6-billion dollar increase in funding over 5 years.

4) Greater focus on robotic instruments and probes instead of manned missions.

5) Competition from private companies will be relied upon to develop craft to take us to low-earth orbit. Until then we'll be hitching rides with the Russians.

6) Life of the ISS will be extended for at least 5 years, possibly longer.

7) Develop new heavy lifting rocket technology to efficiently move large amounts of materials to Earth orbit and beyond.

8) Design a new spaceship for deep space travel by 2025, and have it orbit Mars in a manned mission by 2035.


Any thoughts? So far I'm liking it.

Edit: http://www.physorg.com/news190564316.html

[Phier]

I believe most of the budget increases were for global warming research...I mean climate change.

8) Design a new spaceship for deep space travel by 2015, and have it orbit Mars in a manned mission by 2025

Based on the dates, that won't happen.

[motiv-8]

Based on the dates, that won't happen.

Sounds like they scratched out the word 'moon' and replaced in with 'Mars' in all their old plans, and then continued snorting the kool-aid Tang.

[Gordon Freynman]

http://www.physorg.com/news190564316.html

I got the dates wrong. It's 2025 for the space ship design and 2035 for the manned orbit of Mars mission.

[motiv-8]

http://www.physorg.com/news190564316.html

I got the dates wrong. It's 2025 for the space ship design and 2035 for the manned orbit of Mars mission.

Prospects for that? Sure would be nice to see men getting to Mars before the Alzheimers sets in and I forget what Mars is.

[Gordon Freynman]

Prospects for that? Sure would be nice to see men getting to Mars before the Alzheimers sets in and I forget what Mars is.

Depends on how lazy and inefficient NASA decides to be, but I think it's doable.

Same thing is this will only last till the next republican president and he will only rightly try to enforce his vision for space.

I dunno about that. If Obama's plan actually gets somewhere then I highly doubt the next Pres would have any luck trying to replace it.

Obama is increasing funding for technology which is important imo. Rides into orbit are nothing more than bus rides and anyone can do that. Its the technology that matters.

Agreed.

[Phier]

http://www.physorg.com/news190564316.html

I got the dates wrong. It's 2025 for the space ship design and 2035 for the manned orbit of Mars mission.

202freeking5?

Might as well say 'I'm not funding it, go to hell.'.

This should be a no brainier for him trying to be the black Kennedy, but alas he missed it, lack of long term vision I guess. Instead we get money for bribing senators and congressmen

[Trax]

2) The Orion Capsule from Constellation will be redesigned to serve as an escape pod for the International Space Station.

I thought it was supposed to be replaced by something like SpaceX Dragon, why the sudden change of mind?

8) Design a new spaceship for deep space travel by 2015, and have it orbit Mars in a manned mission by 2025.

Can't say that I have much faith in this. When I heard about the canceled Constellation I knew that I'm not going to see man on Mars in my lifetime. Should it actually happen though then I will worship Obama religiously till the day I die.

[MrMofo]

same stuff, the more improbable and cool stuff is the stuff that's furthest away as a token of hope, the fake carrot in front of the stupid donkey.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Same thing is this will only last till the next republican president and he will only rightly try to enforce his vision for space.

Obama is increasing funding for technology which is important imo. Rides into orbit are nothing more than bus rides and anyone can do that. Its the technology that matters.

[Sphere]

The heavy lift rocket is the key to any manned space exploration so I am happy that there is going to be some funding to keep that program going. But I am equally glad the idea of returning to the moon has been completely ditched, there is no scientific, or even inspirational reason to do it and it would have been a continual drain on NASA resources. Likewise with the the Ares I; there is no reason for NASA to duplicate a earth-orbit launcher when there are better private alternatives.

So in the end I think this new plan for NASA has the correct goals; 1.) Focus on unmanned scientific exploration 2.) A long term program to send people to Mars. However, I am hoping that future administrations and the American public will see fit to boost NASA funding so that realistic timetable for a manned manned mission to Mars can be shortened.

[Gordon Freynman]

God Phier, you're such a pessimist. Must be something that age does to you...

[Tacitursa]

Dont see how they will get a manned mars mission that soon tbh. It takes 250-300 days to get there. That's 500-600 days for a return trip.

Takes 3-4 days to get to the moon.

[Gordon Freynman]

Dont see how they will get a manned mars mission that soon tbh. It takes 250-300 days to get there. That's 500-600 days for a return trip.

Takes 3-4 days to get to the moon.

It will take that long with our current rocket technology, which is the reason we need to develop new ones. There's obviously no way a trip to Mars would be feasible if it took that long.

[Ramashan]

It will take that long with our current rocket technology, which is the reason we need to develop new ones. There's obviously no way a trip to Mars would be feasible if it took that long.

I'm pretty sure any mission to Mars that I've read involves a three year trip. I have not yet read the speech only out takes and responses, but from what I hear it seems there's some investment being made in technology. This is honestly what it will take to get to Mars. The plan I like the most is sending the material to Mars in stages and not all at once. You send the landing craft, more food, fuel, some habitats, a fuel processing facility and everything there before you even send the humans. This way everything is in place. Sort of like the caching method of polar exploration, you send out teams to ahead of you to place supplies and then move in stages.

For this to happen with Mars, we need reliable technology to make it happen.

I'm not happy that we're going to enter a protracted period where the US is incapable of sending people in space ourselves. But if the money is used to get us back in a a better way, then so be it.

[Gobbledigook]

Yes, we must venture to Mars and find the Mass Relay; doing so will save our economy as we quickly enter a war with the barbaric Batarians...

[Phier]

God Phier, you're such a pessimist. Must be something that age does to you...

Never confuse realism with pessimism.

[Trax]

The heavy lift rocket is the key to any manned space exploration so I am happy that there is going to be some funding to keep that program going.

Agreed.

But I am equally glad the idea of returning to the moon has been completely ditched, there is no scientific, or even inspirational reason to do it and it would have been a continual drain on NASA resources.

Can't say I share that point of view. We have a good amount of information about how human body reacts to
0 gravity, but almost no idea how it reacts to long term low gravity environment like Moon, Mars or spaceship with artificial gravity. Also technologies that would have to be developed to sustain a base on the Moon would be very different from those used for the orbital stations. Essentially it would be a Mars lite mission, testing things in a relative safety. Should anything go wrong in case of a real Mars mission nobody is going to come back.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Agreed.



Can't say I share that point of view. We have a good amount of information about how human body reacts to
0 gravity, but almost no idea how it reacts to long term low gravity environment like Moon, Mars or spaceship with artificial gravity. Also technologies that would have to be developed to sustain a base on the Moon would be very different from those used for the orbital stations. Essentially it would be a Mars lite mission, testing things in a relative safety. Should anything go wrong in case of a real Mars mission nobody is going to come back.

Which is all the more reason to develop the technology to get there faster and safer.

Besides, Bush's proposal to go to Mars and the Moon etc was one of the few proposals I liked from him. However, it is no surprise that he completely ignored NASA after getting elected. Funding was lost and there seem to be very little discussion on NASA or Space exploration from his administration. Conservatives are prob more concern about foreign affairs than space exploration which is perfectly understandable but people are complaining about dropping a program that had little outside interest and very little funding, a program that was basically forgotten about after being enacted.

[MathiasOfAthens]

So at the most you need food for two years. Obviously your need something bigger than a space shuttle to hold sooo much food. Then theres also another possibility. Food can be grown on the ship. If that is what you are getting at Wizav?

Im interested in seeing possible ship designs on a future mars craft.