Quote from: Jim on 03/16/2017 04:06 pmQuote from: Star One on 03/16/2017 03:30 pmWhat's it's secondary objectives & that still doesn't answer why try cutting such a piffling amount, it looks silly or even petty?Earth viewing. The primary mission is space weather monitoring and that is still funded.Thanks for the info. Obviously knew about the space weather part of it but didn't realise that there was a dedicated secondary mission on it.
Quote from: Star One on 03/16/2017 03:30 pmWhat's it's secondary objectives & that still doesn't answer why try cutting such a piffling amount, it looks silly or even petty?Earth viewing. The primary mission is space weather monitoring and that is still funded.
What's it's secondary objectives & that still doesn't answer why try cutting such a piffling amount, it looks silly or even petty?
Quote from: Star One on 03/16/2017 03:38 pmYep. But I hoped things like this would escape his notice.Again: forest for the trees. Or to belabor the point: despite dire predictions that Trump was going to wipe out NASA Earth science, or transfer it all to NOAA, he actually only proposed a 5% cut for NASA Earth science. That's it. 5%. The question that everybody should be asking right now is why was that cut so small?
Yep. But I hoped things like this would escape his notice.
By specifically removing the $1.2M for DSCOVR's earth viewing instruments, they are hoping to block access to full disk irradiance data (basically, data that shows that the planet is now taking in more energy than it is losing).
Quote from: JH on 03/16/2017 05:39 pmBy specifically removing the $1.2M for DSCOVR's earth viewing instruments, they are hoping to block access to full disk irradiance data (basically, data that shows that the planet is now taking in more energy than it is losing).Let's see if they can get this cut past the generals as by the sound of it they may face a degree of resistance on this.
I already offered you an explanation in the other thread: Republicans aren't against gathering collecting Earth science data, they are against NASA being used as an advocate against climate change.
Quote from: Star One on 03/16/2017 05:55 pmQuote from: JH on 03/16/2017 05:39 pmBy specifically removing the $1.2M for DSCOVR's earth viewing instruments, they are hoping to block access to full disk irradiance data (basically, data that shows that the planet is now taking in more energy than it is losing).Let's see if they can get this cut past the generals as by the sound of it they may face a degree of resistance on this.Generals? Nope, only members of Congress matter in this discussion. While the USA has the largest military budget in the world by a wide margin, we're still a civilian government.As I've written before, this Presidential budget for NASA doesn't matter. Congress will stay their course and the Administration won't interfere, especially since the two are almost in complete agreement.
Jeff Foust @jeff_foust@ZachInFlight Europa Clipper is not being cut. What’s not being funded is a follow-on lander (and Rep. Culberson will likely rescue it.)
Quote from: yg1968 on 03/16/2017 04:40 pmQuote from: Blackstar on 03/16/2017 03:44 pmQuote from: Star One on 03/16/2017 03:38 pmYep. But I hoped things like this would escape his notice.Again: forest for the trees. Or to belabor the point: despite dire predictions that Trump was going to wipe out NASA Earth science, or transfer it all to NOAA, he actually only proposed a 5% cut for NASA Earth science. That's it. 5%. The question that everybody should be asking right now is why was that cut so small?I already offered you an explanation in the other thread: Republicans aren't against gathering collecting Earth science data, they are against NASA being used as an advocate against climate change. That doesn't explain gutting NOAA, which mostly doesn't do "advocacy against climate change." They do weather satellites.
Quote from: Blackstar on 03/16/2017 03:44 pmQuote from: Star One on 03/16/2017 03:38 pmYep. But I hoped things like this would escape his notice.Again: forest for the trees. Or to belabor the point: despite dire predictions that Trump was going to wipe out NASA Earth science, or transfer it all to NOAA, he actually only proposed a 5% cut for NASA Earth science. That's it. 5%. The question that everybody should be asking right now is why was that cut so small?I already offered you an explanation in the other thread: Republicans aren't against gathering collecting Earth science data, they are against NASA being used as an advocate against climate change.
The DSCOVR thing is just plain weird. The budget doesn't say anything about cancelling the mission (the spacecraft is already up there and functioning), just the Earth observing part. We have a spacecraft up there with a camera and some other instrumentation pointing at Earth, as well as taking some important space weather measurements. And they just want to turn off the camera? What sense does that make? It'll save almost nothing in the grand scheme of things. It's almost like they really are afraid of what the camera will show.
If you wanted an explanation for the cuts to climate funding, here it is:White House: Climate funding is ‘a waste of your money’http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/324358-white-house-says-climate-funding-is-a-waste-of-your-money
Quote from: incoming on 03/16/2017 08:22 pmThe DSCOVR thing is just plain weird. The budget doesn't say anything about cancelling the mission (the spacecraft is already up there and functioning), just the Earth observing part. We have a spacecraft up there with a camera and some other instrumentation pointing at Earth, as well as taking some important space weather measurements. And they just want to turn off the camera? What sense does that make? It'll save almost nothing in the grand scheme of things. It's almost like they really are afraid of what the camera will show. The token monetary savings are a fig leaf. The goal is to hamper the accumulation of evidence of climate change.
Though Triana was a NASA project, canceled under Bush II, it was DoD that resurrected it as DSCOVR, was it not? Didn't DoD have a use for DSCOVR's Earth-viewing instruments?
Would very much like to hear more details on the "initiatives that use smaller, less expensive satellites to advance science," and the refueling demo, if folks here are "in the know." Thanks!
This week's Space to Ground video is all about the cargo, internal and external, Dragon is bringing back:
But packed within NASA’s small budget decrease are some pretty sizable cuts. A few major upcoming missions are canceled, and NASA’s entire education program, which is responsible for outreach and grants, is eliminated. The budget request also proposes wasting technologies already in space.Some of these cuts could have a positive impact on NASA, while others could deprive students and the science community of the space agency’s expertise. Here are the biggest cuts to NASA ranked from “This is good actually” to “What the hell are you doing?”
“Aerospace is a growing sector that provides good quality jobs here in the US. We want to get students from all backgrounds trained in these fields,” says Larson. “STEM education is critical to our long-term competitiveness as a country, and it's interesting in a year where a movie like Hidden Figures was on the national stage that the administration would de-emphasize the role NASA plays in getting kids excited about space.”