Author Topic: NASA's New Direction  (Read 115098 times)

Offline cro-magnon gramps

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
  • Very Ancient Martian National
  • Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 10993
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #140 on: 01/21/2017 09:39 pm »
I don't think you guys know what the union actually does.

If it does more or differently than an Automaker or Transport Union, I would like your take on it :)

edit: I am not being sarcastic, just a curious question, given your statement... I hold you in high esteem as a source here... ok :D
« Last Edit: 01/21/2017 09:41 pm by cro-magnon gramps »
Gramps "Earthling by Birth, Martian by the grace of The Elon." ~ "Hate, it has caused a lot of problems in the world, but it has not solved one yet." Maya Angelou ~ Tony Benn: "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself."

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #141 on: 01/21/2017 09:40 pm »
From all the appointments & talk by Trump, I have to wonder is NASA would be used as an advisory & technical assistance body, with commercial spaceflight taking the lead to move the USA out into space.

Remember, we are looking at a President who wants to make America great again, put America first, make American business prosper, and CUT WASTE. I fear that NASA could be hit with a significant amount of cost cutting, mainly for the fact of unionized jobs limiting maximum production (unless he would get push to amend union labor laws).

Just my 2 cents...
He will only get to do what congress will allow him to do... What he "can" do is stop talking about himself and get to work....
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25223
  • Likes Given: 12114
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #142 on: 01/21/2017 10:23 pm »
I don't think you guys know what the union actually does.

If it does more or differently than an Automaker or Transport Union, I would like your take on it :)

edit: I am not being sarcastic, just a curious question, given your statement... I hold you in high esteem as a source here... ok :D
It does very little. The union has little power because civil servants can't strike. So they're just an employee relations organization.

And you can tell their lack of power from this: Civil servant wage is generally lower than contractor or private sector wage in the same field. If the union is powerful, usually it's the other way around.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8853
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10187
  • Likes Given: 11916
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #143 on: 01/22/2017 03:16 pm »
Plus, just trying to fulfill the promises of "Repeal & Replace" is already looking like it will severely increase the national debt, and that is before trying to throw money at rebuilding our nations infrastructure...

Call access-to-space infrastructure that needs rebuilding... not a stretch.

Not quite logical either, since NASA is no longer needed for non-NASA access to space like it was expected to provide initially with the Shuttle.  The SLS will only support NASA needs, and even then only a portion of them.

The current analogy for moving people and goods on the ground and through the air today is a good one for moving people and good to & through space - the government may own the transportation nodes, but the private sector owns and operates the modes of transportation.  The government should only own transportation elements when they have enough unique government needs, like with the military, but that doesn't exist today.

Quote
Doubt managing what is already on NASA's plate (or the USG's entire 'portfolio' for that matter) fits Trump's campaign slogan.

Agreed.

Quote
Expect change.

That was going to happen anyways for NASA since there are major inflection points coming (i.e. SLS payloads, ISS future, etc.) that require action by the Executive branch and funding by the Legislative branch.  Now we'll just have to wait and see if they can agree on what the course of action will be...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10286
  • Liked: 698
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #144 on: 01/22/2017 03:28 pm »
Remember, budgets are policy, so words about a trip to Mars while cutting the budget are not significant. We are all wondering what future NASA budgets will look like.

In the past, presidents have made announcements about going to Mars, starting with George H.W. Bush in 1989, but have been reluctant to provide the necessary funding.

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #145 on: 01/22/2017 04:52 pm »
Remember, budgets are policy, so words about a trip to Mars while cutting the budget are not significant. We are all wondering what future NASA budgets will look like.

In the past, presidents have made announcements about going to Mars, starting with George H.W. Bush in 1989, but have been reluctant to provide the necessary funding.

You mean Congress has been reluctant to provide necessary funding. Presidents haven't seen the need to use political capital to get Congress to increase NASA funding. It's just not that high on the priorities list.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10286
  • Liked: 698
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #146 on: 01/22/2017 06:05 pm »
Remember, budgets are policy, so words about a trip to Mars while cutting the budget are not significant. We are all wondering what future NASA budgets will look like.

In the past, presidents have made announcements about going to Mars, starting with George H.W. Bush in 1989, but have been reluctant to provide the necessary funding.

You mean Congress has been reluctant to provide necessary funding. Presidents haven't seen the need to use political capital to get Congress to increase NASA funding. It's just not that high on the priorities list.

Either way. If a president does not use political capital to secure funding that they claim is a priority, then it is simply a case of budgets being policy. 

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #147 on: 01/22/2017 11:00 pm »
A large-scale HSF mission can be used tactically by those in power to distract the citizenry similar to what the Romans did with their area games... Remember our program began as a tool and it could be used again to serve a "great-again" illusion agenda...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8853
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10187
  • Likes Given: 11916
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #148 on: 01/23/2017 12:00 am »
A large-scale HSF mission can be used tactically by those in power to distract the citizenry similar to what the Romans did with their area games... Remember our program began as a tool and it could be used again to serve a "great-again" illusion agenda...

If we look to Apollo, the Shuttle and the ISS those programs took years of spending before the public was able to see something to get excited about.  Certainly longer than 4 years.  And as we all know from the Apollo program, the public was against going to the Moon until we were close to actually going to the Moon.

And I think most in Congress will understand this, so I don't think they will fund something new in the hopes of distracting the public, since anything big enough to be useful will require a LOT of funding - and Republican's are already going to running up a massive deficit, which the public won't like.

I don't know, I just don't think it's a likely scenario...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #149 on: 01/23/2017 12:35 am »
A large-scale HSF mission can be used tactically by those in power to distract the citizenry similar to what the Romans did with their area games... Remember our program began as a tool and it could be used again to serve a "great-again" illusion agenda...

If we look to Apollo, the Shuttle and the ISS those programs took years of spending before the public was able to see something to get excited about.  Certainly longer than 4 years.  And as we all know from the Apollo program, the public was against going to the Moon until we were close to actually going to the Moon.

And I think most in Congress will understand this, so I don't think they will fund something new in the hopes of distracting the public, since anything big enough to be useful will require a LOT of funding - and Republican's are already going to running up a massive deficit, which the public won't like.

I don't know, I just don't think it's a likely scenario...
Same could have been said for the "odds" him being the current occupant of the White House... We are in "Terra Incognita" here on all fronts...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25223
  • Likes Given: 12114
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #150 on: 01/23/2017 01:25 am »
A large-scale HSF mission can be used tactically by those in power to distract the citizenry similar to what the Romans did with their area games... Remember our program began as a tool and it could be used again to serve a "great-again" illusion agenda...
Far better than the more common tactic of starting a pointless war somewhere. Even a large scale HSF mission is cheaper than a war, the number of people who can die is very low, it doesn't screw up a bunch of young people, and it doesn't make you look like a huge douche.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25223
  • Likes Given: 12114
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #151 on: 01/23/2017 01:29 am »
You could do a deep space mission in less than 4 years using either SLS/Orion or any commercial crew vehicles and rendezvous.Only way I can see a lunar lander being done in that time, though, is ITS. And even that would be super sketchy schedule-wise. If you could convince Musk to do it subscale, probably easier.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #152 on: 01/23/2017 01:51 am »
A large-scale HSF mission can be used tactically by those in power to distract the citizenry similar to what the Romans did with their area games... Remember our program began as a tool and it could be used again to serve a "great-again" illusion agenda...
Far better than the more common tactic of starting a pointless war somewhere. Even a large scale HSF mission is cheaper than a war, the number of people who can die is very low, it doesn't screw up a bunch of young people, and it doesn't make you look like a huge douche.
No argument on wars Chris. However we have to be vigilant as proponents of spaceflight that we are not selling our souls so that he can provide a circus while under-delivering on his other promises which are more complex than ordering-up a space mission in what he calls a Kennedy moment...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10286
  • Liked: 698
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #153 on: 01/23/2017 01:52 am »
Yeah, war is bad.

That really isn't the issue. The question is what programs will the Trump administration support via additional funding vs those that will be cancelled.

Every incoming administration is accompanied by spacers claiming that this new president is going to send us to Mars or the Moon or wherever, and sometimes they even talk about doing that. The problem is that funding for such adventures never becomes a priority.
« Last Edit: 01/23/2017 01:53 am by Danderman »

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81287
  • Likes Given: 36800
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #154 on: 01/23/2017 09:35 am »
Yes, what does the new administration both want to fund and can persuade congress to fund?

There are clearly a lot of tensions/potential conflict between making government smaller/cutting spending/'draining the swamp' of vested interests etc vs the approach to the funding of large-scale NASA programmes that congress has been approving for years.

Obama succeeded in cancelling constellation only for congress to ensure billions were spent on SLS instead (and more than the administration requested).

Given the slow rate at which it appears the new administration is nominating and getting confirmation of new appointees across government, I think it could be quite a long time before there's any clarity on what may happen in terms of NASA funding (at least for HSF, other areas - climate research? - may be clearer rather sooner).

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #155 on: 01/23/2017 10:41 am »
Yeah, war is bad.

That really isn't the issue. The question is what programs will the Trump administration support via additional funding vs those that will be cancelled.

Every incoming administration is accompanied by spacers claiming that this new president is going to send us to Mars or the Moon or wherever, and sometimes they even talk about doing that. The problem is that funding for such adventures never becomes a priority.

Beating the 'more funding' drum will, get us no where.  What is needed is to get more out of the funds that we have.  NASA has become somewhat pathological in always vastly underestimating what projects will cost and how long they will take to deliver -- JWST being the classical example, Constellation/SLS being another. 

Rewarding programs that over-promise and under-produce must be curtailed.

Find a new way of doing business that gets more bang for the buck.
« Last Edit: 01/23/2017 11:22 am by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12092
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18181
  • Likes Given: 12139
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #156 on: 01/23/2017 11:45 am »
Yeah, war is bad.

That really isn't the issue. The question is what programs will the Trump administration support via additional funding vs those that will be cancelled.

Every incoming administration is accompanied by spacers claiming that this new president is going to send us to Mars or the Moon or wherever, and sometimes they even talk about doing that. The problem is that funding for such adventures never becomes a priority.

Beating the 'more funding' drum will, get us no where.  What is needed is to get more out of the funds that we have.  NASA has become somewhat pathological in always vastly underestimating what projects will cost and how long they will take to deliver -- JWST being the classical example, Constellation/SLS being another. 

Rewarding programs that over-promise and under-produce must be curtailed.

Find a new way of doing business that gets more bang for the buck.

One reason why your vision will never become reality:

Pork

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #157 on: 01/23/2017 12:28 pm »
Yes, what does the new administration both want to fund and can persuade congress to fund?

There are clearly a lot of tensions/potential conflict between making government smaller/cutting spending/'draining the swamp' of vested interests etc vs the approach to the funding of large-scale NASA programmes that congress has been approving for years.

Obama succeeded in cancelling constellation only for congress to ensure billions were spent on SLS instead (and more than the administration requested).

Given the slow rate at which it appears the new administration is nominating and getting confirmation of new appointees across government, I think it could be quite a long time before there's any clarity on what may happen in terms of NASA funding (at least for HSF, other areas - climate research? - may be clearer rather sooner).
They will all get "rubber stamped" by the majority. Just today it was announced that Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham will support Rex Tillerson  confirmation even after their "dog and pony show" rants about him being in Russia's pocket...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12048
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7331
  • Likes Given: 3744
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #158 on: 01/23/2017 01:27 pm »
Given what is known about the new President's views on economic efficiency, I wouldn't be looking for any NASA spending increases at all. Instead I would expect to see a major shift toward increased Public-Private Partnership missions, where industry is encouraged to do grand things with good profit potential in partnership with NASA shouldering the less profitable aspects that tend to hold industry back. For example, industry can not usually afford the cost of basic research that may or may not make a new and promising technology available, but NASA funding could be the bridge that brings that technology to fruition thru government funded research carried out by that industry as part of a partnership program to bring that new capability to a TR-6 level. I would expect to see 2 or 3 new industrial entities that can see a way to profit from offshoot capabilities made possible by partnering with NASA in the process of furthering NASA's own goals, instead of NASA centers being the focus of those activities. I expect NASA to become more lean and efficient over the course of the next 8 years and American industry take a leading role in NASA's objectives at the expense of the far more expensive various NASA centers.

I know that statement will raise a lot of eyebrows here because so many of us "are" the NASA Center SME's. But this entire agency has over the past 50 years become an extremely bloated bureaucracy that, while still capable of great and awesome things, often cannot even get out of its own way. Fixing this will take new players and a paradigm shift in how NASA operates. I see NASA becoming significantly smaller while at the same time becoming the anchor for a growing, for profit, industrial aeronautics and space capability that will both serve the national interests, as NASA was originally chartered for, and advance American industrial capability in space and in aeronautics.

This will also require some changes in Congress, which is the sole funding source for NASA. Today there are several very powerful Senators and Legislators who, for all intents and purposes "ARE" NASA, because they have been in Congress longer than many of the members of the new Administration have been alive. Thus they have driven up the size of the agency and its budget such that nearly half of every dollar spent in the NASA budget is spent on completely unnecessary things for the sole purpose of keeping voters back home employed in high paying jobs, starting new home projects, etc., few of which ever touch anything NASA related. But there is now a very real possibility that Congressional term limits will over the foreseeable future end that situation where anyone in Congress will be there so long as to be able to have that much a stranglehold on NASA's budget. NASA's budget will get smaller as a result, but more funding for actual NASA projects and missions will be spent than is spent today. This will all take time, but that is the sea change that I see coming.
« Last Edit: 01/23/2017 01:36 pm by clongton »
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: NASA's New Direction
« Reply #159 on: 01/23/2017 01:46 pm »
I agree with pretty much all you said above Chuck, however wrt term limits, I find it difficult to see how "professional politicians" will ever vote themselves out of what amounts to a job for life...
~Rob
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1