Texas, Florida and California fight hard to fund NASA.Other states don't care.It's not a lack of will. It's a lack of NASA jobs in your area.That's the way the system was set up.Apollo failed to support the big income states so those big income states will not support NASA.
Quotewe using enough resources for 1.5 "Earths"? Why yes we are. What most people fail to realize is we're PRODUCING resources at well above 2.5 Earths by the "definition" being used by, for example, the study you cite. We are much better at extracting, refining, and production than anyone seems to be taking account of.No that is not true.
we using enough resources for 1.5 "Earths"? Why yes we are. What most people fail to realize is we're PRODUCING resources at well above 2.5 Earths by the "definition" being used by, for example, the study you cite. We are much better at extracting, refining, and production than anyone seems to be taking account of.
We have stated on this thread that with the chicken coup analogy, the roosters are running an oppressive regime.
No doubt we are producing (reproducing) at a rate of 2.5 Earths. The "too many chickens in the coup" argument does not have enough urgency to start a new exploration space race.
Quote from: RanulfC on 05/23/2013 08:24 pmUh, just a minor nit but WVB didn't USE kerolox for his shuttles...True, that is a minor nit for historians. The major nit would be in the pointless use today of such toxic propellants.
Uh, just a minor nit but WVB didn't USE kerolox for his shuttles...
The point still holds that with kerolox launches, at the rate of 900 or so in a year, would not affect the global carbon footprint all that much. The common wisdom holds that launch costs would reduce in line with the mass production of so many nearly identical rockets.
It has never been the case that the US simply has not had the money or the industrial capacity or the workforce talent to engage in such an endeavor.
Quote from: spectre9 on 05/25/2013 01:07 amTexas, Florida and California fight hard to fund NASA.Other states don't care.It's not a lack of will. It's a lack of NASA jobs in your area.That's the way the system was set up.Apollo failed to support the big income states so those big income states will not support NASA.'Fraid not. You missed quite a few, Mississippi, Alabama, and Utah for example and you seem to ignore the fact that the Apollo program DID in fact "support" and bring a lot of money into the "big" income states during the entire program just like the Shuttle did and SLS is doing. Several states do NOT care and this reflects with their "status" in the place they have in the various groups that actually decide policy. (And before you deride the "input" of the above mentioned states I'll quitely remind you where the EXACT specification for "130-tons" to orbit came from? That's the number the "experts" told the state delegation would REQUIRE SRBs remember No it really IS a lack of will. Along with a lack of resolve and an inability to "see" anything beyond a short-term/near-term money/jobs/votes perspective that has been ALL that NASA and HSF has ever meant to the politicians.Advocating doesn't do any good because the only thing they take away from such things is "sound-bytes" and "talking-points" that they can spout back and do not have to, (or intend to) do anything with.In a way this can be a good thing in that without "directed" action and a mandated focus NASA can simply build up capability with slow steady progression. The down side is that eventually there comes a point where both funding and support within the political structure are required to move beyond simply building capability.Besides, from a purely political point-of-view it is very entertaining to watch the various sub-groups and interests undercut, back-stab, and deride each other when given a public forum. The one thing they do NOT want is a consensus opinion presented...Randy
Those smaller states are supported by the big ones. Texas and Florida had the find the money for SLS. Nelson and KBH had to fight hard and put their reputations on the line to do that.
It's a recession. Procuring funding for projects that don't create jobs in your state is a bad idea. Texas and Florida get to support SLS in terms of mission design and launch operations.
California has JPL which fights to keep it's planetary missions funded. They don't want their money going to SLS which is what Charlie is trying to do. He'll most likely fail like when he failed to cut Mars funding and Insight was selected under another class and Mars 2020 was announced.
There is a will to do manned BEO exploration just not a way for everybody to keep all their funding for jobs in their state at the same time.
...I'd point out that the launch cost thing isn't so linear as one might expect.
Quote from: RanulfC on 05/28/2013 09:08 pm...I'd point out that the launch cost thing isn't so linear as one might expect.
Never said it was linear. The launch cost trendline would be down, and it would accelerate over time, as the economy accomodated the demand of tourists and others. It is not as important the rate of increasing slope of that cost line.
But anyhow... we're not going anywhere, not even where they say they're aiming. Until there's a principled grass roots movement on HSF, the political players will struggle with divining and implementing competent and useful exploration concepts.
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 05/30/2013 01:04 pmNever said it was linear.Quote from: RanulfC on 05/28/2013 09:08 pm...I'd point out that the launch cost thing isn't so linear as one might expect.(Fixed, ... )
Never said it was linear.Quote from: RanulfC on 05/28/2013 09:08 pm...I'd point out that the launch cost thing isn't so linear as one might expect.
I wasn't meaning to imply otherwise actually, I only meant that there were a LOT of "assumptions" in the overall architecture as well as missing a lot of "factors" that didn't occur to the thinking at the time ...
The political players don't "struggle" at all, that would imply they "care" at all and they generally don't. (As with the general population, the percentage that DO is far to small to be effective even if it WAS organized)The general problem here is that "grassroots" implies at least a general consensus that is capable of presenting a coherent and united plan/front to the polticians. ...
Quote from: RanulfC on 05/30/2013 10:05 pmQuote from: JohnFornaro on 05/30/2013 01:04 pmNever said it was linear.Quote from: RanulfC on 05/28/2013 09:08 pm...I'd point out that the launch cost thing isn't so linear as one might expect.(Fixed, ... )Thanks for the advice and the repair! Could you two quickly solve the mission prioritization problem too? Thanx. Much obliged...
As you mentioned, the USG has no "incentive and pretty much every reason imaginable to NOT do so"; to not support HSF. It is the functional equivalent of "keeping" humanity in LEO at best. It is every bit as effective as public law 'xyz' to the same end. It is only private individuals, 'tourists", if you will, which can break the logjam. It is tourists walking on Luna, or visiting a ring station who will pay the way. Photoshopped selfies on a starry background will not pay the way, even on an introductory level.
Until there are people up there, there is no need to grab a rock, fry the water out of it, and have a drink.
That is correct. And as long as the mass media continues to mock any ideas which have not been 'rigorously examined' in the invitation only scientific circles, and released for public consumption, we are simply not going to have a grassroots movement, and will not be going anywhere.Not invented here. Move along, move along.
Chapter 3:Has any other country taken a flight crew beyond low earth orbit???
The problem is more than that, the problem is even if the mass media "got-onboard" the general public is still going to dismiss the idea of a major human presence in space unless and until it becomes significantly relevent to the daily life of the avererage person.
Quote from: RigelFive on 06/07/2013 01:19 amChapter 3:Has any other country taken a flight crew beyond low earth orbit???I know you know that the answer is no.The Chinese are doing their darndest. They quite realize that more face would be lost in a fatal accident than would be lost in proceeding slowly and cautiously. So two points for Slytherin.
Then stick a dozen people in a non-internet connected room with a pencil and paper pad. Let them sketch out a new space plan in one week.
have supreme confidence that there is no way this group would come up with a 500 billion dollar boondoggle to lasso a boulder in space to return it to lunar orbit...