-
#60 by Nathan on 29 Jul, 2012 10:28
-
Then NASA needs to be redisgned to be a commercial space incubator. But It is not that at present despite the success of cots. Until that change happens, unless we re going to mars then we are not going to mars. Pretty simple really.If we want to go to mars - go to mars! There is only so much money in the pot.
I want to terraform Mars and have millions of people living there. I want Ceres to become an integral part of the enormous and growing human economic sphere. And, after fifty-two years of being a space cadet, I do not see how some footprints on Mars or hand prints on an asteroid and then zero crewed missions to those locations for fifty or more years will help to enable a permanent human presence on Ceres and Mars.
If we really want to spend the money and run the risks of repeated Mars and asteroid missions, we first need to greatly improve our space skills to reduce those risks and costs. We need to create a large and permanent cislunar technology and asset base. Exploiting Lunar resources will change how we think about space and encourage leaders of various types to invest human lives and money in the more difficult and dangerous NEO, Mars, and Ceres missions.
Older space cadets have seen how the narrow and single-minded pursuit of a grand and expensive space goal can lead to initial success and then stagnation, retreat, lost technical capabilities, indifference, and an extremely foolish "Been there, done that" science and imagination failure of our political and financial elites.
Broad international exploration and economic development of known Lunar resources and a large increase in the commercial and scientific use of the advantages of L2 and cislunar space are what we need to do now in order to greatly improve our odds of successful and ongoing extensive human exploration and use of Mars, Ceres, and many NEOs.
Cheers! -
#61 by HappyMartian on 29 Jul, 2012 10:32
-
"Decide, O Queen; poor Louis can decide nothing: execute this Flight-project, or at least abandon it."
-The French Revolution, Thomas Carlyle
http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1301/pg1301.txt Chapter 2.4.I.
Thomas Carlyle, "Our main business is not to see what lies dimly in the distance, but to do what lies clearly at hand.”
Thomas Carlyle, "So here hath been dawning another blue day: Think, wilt thou let it slip useless away?"
From: http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThomasCarlyleHathDawning/llpgg/post.htm
-
#62 by HappyMartian on 29 Jul, 2012 10:57
-
...
Then NASA needs to be redisgned to be a commercial space incubator. But It is not that at present despite the success of cots. Until that change happens, unless we re going to mars then we are not going to mars. Pretty simple really.
[/quote]
The success and limitations of COTS will need to be evaluated over a twenty or thirty year period of time. Use what we have now, to do what we need to do now and in the near future. Commercial, NASA, and many other space organizations will have failures and difficulties and successes in their diverse space efforts.
One 'business plan' or one method of doing things will not be suitable for all that needs to be done in cislunar, L2, and Lunar exploration and exploitation. Many countries will prefer to have their national space agencies directly involved in their initial beyond LEO space efforts, including those activities that will eventually be done by various businesses.
Think about forms of international cooperation that include the widest possible number of diverse countries and businesses. Ask yourself how North Korea and Iran could be included in this international effort to fully explore and exploit the resources of space. Whatever you do, don't expect NASA to do it all.
-
#63 by vulture4 on 17 Aug, 2012 02:37
-
I would be happy if we could just persuade Congress to let NASA talk to China.
-
#64 by HappyMartian on 17 Aug, 2012 07:57
-
I would be happy if we could just persuade Congress to let NASA talk to China.
International Workshop on Mars and the Moon: Changing Perspectives and New Questions
At: http://www.spaceref.com/calendar/calendar.html?pid=7110
"Date: 6-10 Ag 2012
Location: Beijing, CN"
And, "The workshop will include scientists from the US, Europe, and China and will encompass all aspects of Mars and Moon science from geophysics and geology to aeronomy and solar wind interactions. The workshop is one week before the AOGS meeting (Singapore) and 2 weeks before the IAU general assembly (Beijing)."
Don't worry vulture4. Ever changing official rules and prohibitions and policies may be publicly followed by agencies, but individuals live in the real world. If I've learned anything in the last 60 years, it is that most people are friendly and like to talk and learn about what other folks are doing and would like to do.
Cheers! -
#65 by Robotbeat on 21 Aug, 2012 16:39
-
I would be happy if we could just persuade Congress to let NASA talk to China.
I don't think that would really help. Heck, it might be better if they don't. Nationalism got us to the Moon. With more cooperation and less competitive nationalism, would we even have bothered? It's quite possible that the total budgets would've been much less for Apollo (and the Soviet efforts) had we been buddy-buddy with them.
I say, let the Chinese build their space station. Let them go to the Moon, because there's no way Congress would increase NASA's funds otherwise!
Of course, I hope it is done in a somewhat friendly manner, though fiercely competitive. -
#66 by Warren Platts on 22 Aug, 2012 04:44
-
lol Chris! Am I wrong in believing your thinking is changing?
In contrast to Apollo, there is the example of ISS. Would ISS have happened were it not for the web of international agreements? Americans have no problem backstabbing each other, but let a piece of paper be signed with some potentate across the sea, there's no going back....
I think we should be talking to the Chinese. I'll bet they would be interested in signing some sort of agreement to create a major joint project with the USA and Canada and Russia and EU and Japan and everyone else! But I wonder what that project would be...
-
#67 by Robotbeat on 22 Aug, 2012 21:03
-
lol Chris! Am I wrong in believing your thinking is changing?
Yes, you are wrong. I have not changed in this regard.
... -
#68 by HappyMartian on 22 Aug, 2012 22:35
-
lol Chris! Am I wrong in believing your thinking is changing?
In contrast to Apollo, there is the example of ISS. Would ISS have happened were it not for the web of international agreements? Americans have no problem backstabbing each other, but let a piece of paper be signed with some potentate across the sea, there's no going back....
I think we should be talking to the Chinese. I'll bet they would be interested in signing some sort of agreement to create a major joint project with the USA and Canada and Russia and EU and Japan and everyone else! But I wonder what that project would be...
I know!
Oh, and Robotbeat, you might not get those large space race budgets this time around. Despite your hopes for the competition being friendly, feeding the fires of nationalism could get an out of control blazing inferno. You might even get drafted. You might witness a boom and bust space program that leaves humans going nowhere but LEO for forty years. And then, if humans aren't going to an asteroid and Mars and beyond, why not wait forty or fifty years and let the robots get smarter before we send them beyond LEO. And why are we humans even doing LEO? BTDT. Maybe we should just shut that down too!
I like Warren's ideas much better.
And remember folks, "Asteroid Next" missions: Proving Grounds for future crewed Mars missions is a whole lot more riskier than the "Moon Next". And needed human spaceflight capabilities and experience in cislunar space and on the Moon is what Congress is funding and also the current legal responsibility of NASA.
Public Law 111–267
111th Congress
An Act
To authorize the programs of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
for fiscal years 2011 through 2013, and for other purposes.
At:http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/649377main_PL_111-267.pdf
....
"TITLE III—EXPANSION OF HUMAN
SPACE FLIGHT BEYOND THE INTERNATIONAL
SPACE STATION AND LOW EARTH
ORBIT
SEC. 301. HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT BEYOND LOW-EARTH ORBIT.
(a) FINDINGS
....
Cheers!
