Nasa hasn't changed one bit

[toadlife 3]

Someone or somthing needs to fix this massive bureaucracy we call NASA.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/983751.asp?vts=102320031106&cp1=1

I think part of the problem is funding (or lack of public interest), and part the nature of NASA. In the last couple of years I've read about some brilliant ideas that would make space exploration less much less expensive, but organizations like NASA ignore all ideas that don't come from within, as if they taking ideas from outside would jeopardize their Monopoly on government funding for space exploration.

Wish I could give links on these 'ideas' I'm talking about, but I can't remember where I heard/read/saw them.

[EiZei 0]

Don't worry, when the chinese start thinking seriously about sending a manned mission to mars things might change.

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

Speaking of NASA, has anyone played w/ Keyhole yet? You can download it from nvidia.com

[Guest]

And when a few more astronauts die I'm sure they will investigate (again) and fix all their problems (again). Or of course, they could just scrap NASA and ensure everyone in the USA had enough food to eat and proper health care. But that's just silly...isn't it?

[edc 0]

lmao, nobody complains when China sends a guy into space, and look at all the poverty/disease/etc. over there!

[Lt_Damage 0]

The money the US government actually gives NASA is insignificant, and nothing will benefit mankind more in the long run than continued space exploration.

Think outside the square you live in because once you've fucked up that square and it's resources are gone you'll have to know what is outside it.

[CosmicCastaway 0]

Quote[/b] ]American commander C. Michael Foale

Grrrrrrrr. Facts damn you MSNBC facts! The guys British.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

The Zubrin converter is a good example of technology Nasa ignored (although it seems to have been noticed a little now, a couple of decades after it was proposed)

Basically it was a way to do a fast, cheap, safe manned mission to mars.

[USSoldier11B 0]

Hmmm, seems like we only keep NASA around to put satellites in space for us. (and to fix them) Meanwhile we throw them a bone and let them spend a chunk of the federal budget to put a Tyco RC car on a celestial object of little or no real importance in my opinion. NASA has for several decades fallen victim to what sociologists call "group think." Producing a brand of bureaucratic tunnel vision upon which fatal disasters are spawned from arrogance and apathy in general. If the space travel and exploration industry ever becomes privatized successfully NASA might find itself on the chopping block. I think most Americans ask "What's the point?"

[edc 0]

Without satellites, we wouldn't have the wonders of modern communications, meteroligists woudn't have as much information to base their predictions on, etc, etc. Though, I do think we need to be doing bigger and better things with NASA, such as going back to the moon for a extended period, and eventually to Mars, both of which we really could do if we wanted to.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

NASA is like the Am-Track of the aerospace world. Badly run, unprofitable, and largely unnecessary. The old bird should be scaled back over the next 15 years in favor of increased private sector involvement in space exploration/exploitation. On the other hand I recommend summary execution for the first advertising executive who even thinks about emplacing a massive corporate logo on the surface of the moon that's visible from Earth.

[hellfish6 7]

I don't think that axeing NASA would help anybody right now. I do think that they need to get their heads out of their asses, though, and start thinking thin. I don't think that there can be such a thing as a useless exploration of space, because we still not so little that every little thing we do up there increases our knowledge, but NASA has a bad habit of moving slowly and incurring high costs in the process.

The US government should at the very least threaten to subsidize private space ventures with NASA money. If we're going to give money into the development of our future, we may as well give it to people that know how to maximize their returns.

Do we really want China to be the first country to land a person on Mars? It seems to me that within twenty years it might be possible for them, as they aren't neglecting their space program like we are, and since space travel is such a huge boost to their government's and nation's image.

It'll be a sad day if the red flag flies over the red planet. It'll mean that the best the human race has to offer is a country led by a corrupt cabal of men with a poor human rights record.

[theavonlady 2]

It'll be a sad day if the red flag flies over the red planet.

Why? It's nicely color coordinated!

[ralphwiggum 6]

ok that's it Avon, post count reduction.

[Acecombat 0]

Well the chinese plan on going to the moon is very close.

Soon they'll start living there as building a colony there by 2010 is on their agenda i think i read it in a newspaper someplace.

Thats somthing scary now if they start populating the moon.....

[theavonlady 2]

Thats somthing scary now if they start populating the moon.....

Unless they ship all their SARS cases there.

But seriously Ralph...........................

I think NASA wasted tons of money and put crews at too much risk with the current program.

I'm all for funding alternatives with proper supervision but goals have to be set.

If getting a man on Mars is nothing but a page in the GBOWR, I'm against it.

[hellfish6 7]

A Chinese colony by 2010? I think that's VERY optimistic, and not likely. Maybe by 2020. China's growing by leaps and bounds, but I don't see them getting there that fast.

[Acecombat 0]

A Chinese colony by 2010? I think that's VERY optimistic, and not likely. Maybe by 2020. China's growing by leaps and bounds, but I don't see them getting there that fast.

Why not?

Its not like they are afraid to do it now since someone already has done it and they should have their basics right , only thing required would be funding i guess , thats the only obstacle i see for them not technology though.

[ralphwiggum 6]

If that was feasible, either USSR or US would have done it. when it comes to space exploration, China had to accquire Soyuz technology to send their man up in space.

besides, to set up colony, you nedd to send people to moon first, which China has yet to accomplish.

[hellfish6 7]

Yeah, it's not an easy thing to get people there, let alone create an entire habitat for them. I doubt that the US could do it by 2010. It would require such a huge amount of funding and creation or an entire series of new rockets or reuseable vehicles that even if they started building today, the US probably wouldn't have the capability to send people to the moon and bring them back for several years.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think NASA should get the axe- more like an amputation or two. It should change its roll from an all encompassing self-contained agency to a much more streamlined entity.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Space, or at least some portion of it, needs to be opened up to commercial concerns if we want to see colonies, space vehicles, etc.

Gates could finance about 47 manned missions to mars with current technology: the price would drop VERY rapidly with corporate research.

[Acecombat 0]

Space, or at least some portion of it, needs to be opened up to commercial concerns if we want to see colonies, space vehicles, etc.

Gates could finance about 47 manned missions to mars with current technology: the price would drop VERY rapidly with corporate research.

Yeah try and get it past the US govt and its uber secrecy of trying to manipulate everything in the sector first.

I dont think thats gonna happen anytime soon though if NASA suffer another heavy loss this just might become a reality

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

The US is not the only country with space technology

[USSoldier11B 0]

Ha, I seriously doubt China will have a colony on Mars by 2010, hell, they won't even have the basic necessities for all of their citizens in my lifetime here on Earth. That would be an EXTREMELY aggressive undertaking even if NASA, ESA, and the Russians went in on it together.