Author Topic: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars  (Read 7676 times)

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 1042
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #60 on: 08/05/2018 02:11 PM »
I was just listening to the Planetary Society's monthly podcast on Space Policy, which was about Mars policy in general and this meeting in particular.

It was dissapointing in the same way as the meeting itself.  Not only did the program not mention that the Senators did not address non-NASA efforts on manned Mars trips, but the program participants did not bring it up themselves

They presented the Society's new Principles for Manned Spaceflight and they continue to conflate a goal of "mankind should explore space" with "NASA should send humans beyond LEO".  As though nobody else is working on this.

They did at least bemoan the fact that even NASA's budget for technology developemt is being cut back, but they did not mention, for example, that SpaceX has its own ECLSS development project.

What does Planetary Society want to mess with human spaceflight anyway? They're a planetary science advocacy organization, and since there's no private company funding for planetary science, they are 100% dependent on congress, which means they wouldn't dare saying a bad word about congressional decisions on human spaceflight.

the Planetary society lives in their own little world, as do most space "enthusiast" and their own little world is well science.  they think that the US (and others) are going to spend hundreds of billions on going to Mars just for "the science"

it wont happen of course, but as uncrewed missions have become very expensive, and are not yielding any "non science" reason for continuing to spend the money...well money has gotten tight and they are looking for cash cows

the sad thing is that we will not go to Mars or do anything really at an accelerated rate, until someone comes up with something that humans do in space that makes money larger than the money it takes to keep them there

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5472
  • Liked: 987
  • Likes Given: 653
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #61 on: 08/07/2018 01:58 PM »
my take on the chinese government is that they are interested in only doing human space  with them as "the lead" and "others" on board who are there for government interaction purposes.  Ie they treat their guest much as we treated, oh the guy from Saudi Arabia when he rode on the shuttle.

Since the EU is unlikely to commit the resources to be a leading power in space flight, especially human spaceflight, I suspect that a Chinese-EU partnership could be a pretty good fit to the aspirations of both entities.  The EU gets to participate in something bigger than it would fund by itself, and China gets to be a leader on the world stage in a role formerly reserved for the US.  And, with the EU now so annoyed with the US, there's never been a better time.
« Last Edit: 08/07/2018 02:00 PM by Proponent »

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 1042
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #62 on: 08/07/2018 02:11 PM »
my take on the chinese government is that they are interested in only doing human space  with them as "the lead" and "others" on board who are there for government interaction purposes.  Ie they treat their guest much as we treated, oh the guy from Saudi Arabia when he rode on the shuttle.

Since the EU is unlikely to commit the resources to be a leading power in space flight, especially human spaceflight, I suspect that a Chinese-EU partnership could be a pretty good fit to the aspirations of both entities.  The EU gets to participate in something bigger than it would fund by itself, and China gets to be a leader on the world stage in a role formerly reserved for the US.  And, with the EU now so annoyed with the US, there's never been a better time.

in trying to figure out where "policy goes" one has to really not get into "and then a miracle happens and wow the world changes"...because at that point ie the miracle happens its hard to guess at what forces will be in play.  my Dad is a lawyer and decades ago he did a lot of work for a "upstart" airline out of Dallas, they had no money to pay him, so they paid him in stock certificates (and he was OK with that)..  I was a child but through his stock purchase plans "I" bought a lot of stock.  my mom use to laugh at using the stock certificates to cover the holes in the roof

well its priceless now :)

if the timeline in space development does not change "much" ...ie prices come down (as one hopes Block 5 will do) and capability goes up...than unless US and EU politics change soon.  I think you are right on the money

and that would be an amazing "accomplishment" for the Chinese...it would be yet another sign that we are decaying as a superpower

on the other hand if there are game changers anything is possible

If BFR  does lower cost to say 1/2 of a Falcon heavy launch and is still the same size and payload as the nice vids say...than it is hard to see "where" the ball bounces from there. IF BFR or something from BO doubles the payload of a heavy and lowers cost even 80 percent...thats a game changer

If teh SABRE engine works...well the entire field is new.  everything to that point is probably obsolete.

« Last Edit: 08/07/2018 02:12 PM by TripleSeven »

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5472
  • Liked: 987
  • Likes Given: 653
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #63 on: 08/07/2018 03:41 PM »
I was just listening to the Planetary Society's monthly podcast on Space Policy, which was about Mars policy in general and this meeting in particular.

It was dissapointing in the same way as the meeting itself.  Not only did the program not mention that the Senators did not address non-NASA efforts on manned Mars trips, but the program participants did not bring it up themselves....

The participants did make the good, though depressing point, that I should have picked up on myself:  despite the topic being NASA's progress toward Mars, the senators neglected to invite a single witness from NASA!  They probably knew what they would hear (NASA's doing pretty much nothing about going to Mars, especially not by the 2030s).

EDIT:  Added "the" 5th word in 1st sentence.
« Last Edit: 08/09/2018 01:54 PM by Proponent »

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 1042
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #64 on: 08/07/2018 03:51 PM »
I was just listening to the Planetary Society's monthly podcast on Space Policy, which was about Mars policy in general and this meeting in particular.

It was dissapointing in the same way as the meeting itself.  Not only did the program not mention that the Senators did not address non-NASA efforts on manned Mars trips, but the program participants did not bring it up themselves....

The participants did make good, though depressing point, that I should have picked up on myself:  despite the topic being NASA's progress toward Mars, the senators neglected to invite a single witness from NASA!  They probably knew what they would hear (NASA's doing pretty much nothing about going to Mars, especially not by the 2030s).

2030...12 years or so away...my 4 year old with be 16, I'll be 64, my 8 year old will be 20, my 26 year old 38...unless they raise the retirement age I will have 1 year left of flight ops...

and no body will be on Mars ...  if we are lucky lots of robots...but no person

all of this is depressing :)

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1117
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 345
  • Likes Given: 398
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #65 on: 08/07/2018 04:07 PM »
Don't know if this is more depressing but the Social Security Retirement Calculator says if you are born in 1960 or later, full retirement is 67.

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 1042
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #66 on: 08/07/2018 04:29 PM »
Don't know if this is more depressing but the Social Security Retirement Calculator says if you are born in 1960 or later, full retirement is 67.

yes the FAA and EASA are considering moving the age to 67.  I can still fit into my naval flight suit from my F14 days and ride my bike 12 miles a day...and have three kids and a wife so it keeps me going

:)

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8386
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4744
  • Likes Given: 1501
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #67 on: 08/07/2018 08:26 PM »
my take on the chinese government is that they are interested in only doing human space  with them as "the lead" and "others" on board who are there for government interaction purposes.  Ie they treat their guest much as we treated, oh the guy from Saudi Arabia when he rode on the shuttle.

Since the EU is unlikely to commit the resources to be a leading power in space flight, especially human spaceflight, I suspect that a Chinese-EU partnership could be a pretty good fit to the aspirations of both entities.  The EU gets to participate in something bigger than it would fund by itself, and China gets to be a leader on the world stage in a role formerly reserved for the US.  And, with the EU now so annoyed with the US, there's never been a better time.
Where you wrote EU you should have written ESA. EU and ESA are not the same thing.

Offline su27k

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1104
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #68 on: 08/08/2018 01:39 AM »
NASA doesnít have the funds to get to Mars alone, Ted Cruz says


Quote
"We've seen NASA budgets in recent years increasing, and increasing substantially, but weíre never going to have sufficient taxpayer money to fund what needs to be done in space unless we can leverage billions and billions of dollars from the private sector," he said. "That's how we get the resources that are really needed to conquer the next frontier."

Quote
"The innovation that we're seeing from SpaceX and from private companies across the board is much of the reason for the optimism we see concerning space," Cruz said. "We need competition and entrepreneurs inventing and innovating. You know, just a few years ago the concept of reusable rockets, rockets that could land and be used again, would have seemed like science fiction. Now we're seeing that done. That's the kind of innovation it's going to take to get to Mars and beyond, and it is only through robust competition in the private sector that we'll see that happen."
« Last Edit: 08/08/2018 02:28 AM by su27k »

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7542
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 1152
  • Likes Given: 7714
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #69 on: 08/08/2018 07:06 AM »
2030...12 years or so away...my 4 year old with be 16, I'll be 64, my 8 year old will be 20, my 26 year old 38...unless they raise the retirement age I will have 1 year left of flight ops...

and no body will be on Mars ...  if we are lucky lots of robots...but no person

all of this is depressing :)
Well, certainly not NASA.

But that begs the question is "The US Space Programme" NASA only?

I would argue that question used to be very clear cut, but the ground is (sloooooowly) shifting and there are (modest) grounds for optimism.
BFS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of flying in Earth and Mars atmospheres. BFR. The worlds biggest Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured booster for BFS. First flight to Mars by end of 2022. Forward looking statements. T&C apply. Believe no one. Run your own numbers. So, you are going to Mars to start a better life? Picture it in your mind. Now say what it is out loud.

Online ThereIWas3

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 739
  • Liked: 333
  • Likes Given: 260
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #70 on: 08/08/2018 01:28 PM »
It is nice to hear senior members of the panel express optimism about commercial progress in this area.  Now they need to take the next step: the only way to actually benefit from what SpaceX is doing is to use it!  And that means use it in place of SLS, not in addition.  If NASA is going to be able to afford to contribute anything to the Mars effort, it first has to be rid of the dollar-sucking pork programs that Congress has saddled it with.
"If you want to build a ship, donít drum up people to collect wood and donít assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea" - Antoine de Saint-Exupťry

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10440
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7285
  • Likes Given: 5086
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #71 on: 08/08/2018 03:41 PM »
It is nice to hear senior members of the panel express optimism about commercial progress in this area.  Now they need to take the next step: the only way to actually benefit from what SpaceX is doing is to use it!  And that means use it in place of SLS, not in addition.  If NASA is going to be able to afford to contribute anything to the Mars effort, it first has to be rid of the dollar-sucking pork programs that Congress has saddled it with.
(fan) Well sure. But the cards aren't there to cancel SLS at this time. It needs to totter on for a while first, to the point that commercial alternatives are obviously better, faster and cheaper. Sadly
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7542
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 1152
  • Likes Given: 7714
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #72 on: 08/08/2018 08:38 PM »
(fan) Well sure. But the cards aren't there to cancel SLS at this time. It needs to totter on for a while first, to the point that commercial alternatives are obviously better, faster and cheaper. Sadly
Yes.

This may be a very unwelcome thought for some people, but it is the most plausible direction that things will develop in, for the foreseeable future.
BFS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of flying in Earth and Mars atmospheres. BFR. The worlds biggest Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured booster for BFS. First flight to Mars by end of 2022. Forward looking statements. T&C apply. Believe no one. Run your own numbers. So, you are going to Mars to start a better life? Picture it in your mind. Now say what it is out loud.

Offline MickQ

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 510
  • Australia.
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 160
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #73 on: 08/11/2018 04:03 AM »
And That is also depressing.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9556
  • UK
  • Liked: 1758
  • Likes Given: 183
Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #74 on: 08/11/2018 09:38 AM »
Pork. This hearing is about Mars vs Moon government space. It's Congress vs the White House.

Besides, few in government ever believe Elon is actually going to do what he says he's gunna do. When BFS becomes a reality we'll see a little bit of shakeup but there's still going to be denial.

Maybe thatís not so unfounded. But maybe you donít read the business pages?

Things are never as straight line as some like or think they will be. No one is completely free from outside factors. Trying to term this diplomatically.
« Last Edit: 08/11/2018 09:40 AM by Star One »

Offline Hauerg

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 736
  • Berndorf, Austria
  • Liked: 344
  • Likes Given: 1119
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #75 on: 08/11/2018 11:15 AM »
By now it is not about the funds. It is about culture.
About growing some balls.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9556
  • UK
  • Liked: 1758
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #76 on: 08/11/2018 11:38 AM »
By now it is not about the funds. It is about culture.
About growing some balls.

Itís always about the money.

Online speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2561
  • Fife
  • Liked: 1284
  • Likes Given: 1400
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #77 on: 08/11/2018 02:04 PM »
By now it is not about the funds. It is about culture.

Itís always about the money.
Differences in culture are more important than money.
Spending ten times more doesn't always get you ten times more.

You can spend 30 billion on SLS (out to the tenth launch say).

Or you can - even without BFR, solely using FH, in a reusable launch mode with a stretched second stage and a block buy at $100M per, get 1500 tons or so to LEO, for the (amortised) price SLS would get you 100.

It is unclear if propellant transfer, and ... are technologically ready with no development. They certainly haven't been tried.
Trying them rather than leaping into development assuming they aren't possible is a matter of culture.


« Last Edit: 08/11/2018 02:06 PM by speedevil »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9556
  • UK
  • Liked: 1758
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #78 on: 08/11/2018 02:07 PM »
By now it is not about the funds. It is about culture.

Itís always about the money.
Differences in culture are more important than money.
You can spend 30 billion on SLS (out to the tenth launch say).

Or you can - even without BFR, solely using FH, in a reusable launch mode with a stretched second stage and a block buy at $100M per, get 1500 tons or so to LEO, for the (amortised) price SLS would get you 100.

It is unclear if propellant transfer, and ... are technologically ready with no development. They certainly haven't been tried.
Trying them rather than leaping into development assuming they aren't possible is a matter of culture.

SLS lives arguably because of where the money is spent. Yes itís partly a cultural thing but the money interest is more important.

Offline Greenfish

  • Member
  • Posts: 6
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Senate Hearing: Destination Mars
« Reply #79 on: 08/15/2018 12:48 PM »
my take on the chinese government is that they are interested in only doing human space  with them as "the lead" and "others" on board who are there for government interaction purposes.  Ie they treat their guest much as we treated, oh the guy from Saudi Arabia when he rode on the shuttle.

Since the EU is unlikely to commit the resources to be a leading power in space flight, especially human spaceflight, I suspect that a Chinese-EU partnership could be a pretty good fit to the aspirations of both entities.  The EU gets to participate in something bigger than it would fund by itself, and China gets to be a leader on the world stage in a role formerly reserved for the US.  And, with the EU now so annoyed with the US, there's never been a better time.
Where you wrote EU you should have written ESA. EU and ESA are not the same thing.

Heh, You are both correct. You are correct that ESA and the EU are different things, and that the EU is a contributor to ESA, and they are sufficiently different that the EU is trying to take over ESA, but Proponent is correct that any step up in ESA spending is going to come from the EU. It's not going to come from the individual countries. They spend money on Space, and basically expect to get it back in spending in their own country. So anything over and above that is going to have to come from the EU.

But things are going to have to change substantially within the EU if that is going to happen. The thing that might not be obvious to someone in the  US, (or even in europe) is that the EU is actually a really small organization, with a relatively small budget. There's only about 50,000 people working for the EU, and it has a total budget of $170 bn, or about 1% of EU GDP, about a third of which goes on the Common agricultural policy.  It's nothing like the US federal Govt, in that most of those functions are carried out by the member govts in that it's more of a co-ordination body that operates by getting people to adopt common standards.

However the current rows between the US administration and the EU have been coming a long way down the Tracks, and since the 2000 election (and in truth the 1994 gingrich landslide) and the hostility of the US to the Euro, there has been a slow steady move to make the European countries less reliant on the US for a variety of things, hence the EU developing its own GPS system, and ESA finding all that money to help build an ariane 6 just to keep things ticking over.

The likely outcome of the current unpleasantness between the US and the EU, on the one hand, and the EU and Russia on the other hand is likely to lead to a considerable strengthening of the EU at the 'expense' of the member countries, however no country likes paying more money to the EU, so the EU is going to have to get an independent income stream from somewhere, and you are starting to see EU countries getting their collective act together to tax multinational corporations, who use inconsistencies between tax systems of member states to avoid paying virtually any tax on corporate activities or profits.

So essentially, right now ESA potters along doing its thing, but The EU Centre is going to have to get stronger, and get its hands on more money, and then you could see them spending a lot more on space activities.

Tags: