I take it back Mr President!

[Warped]

NASA's Far-Out New Plans

By all accounts, President Barack Obama's new proposal for NASA's future is a game-changer.

The plan calls for abandoning the status quo — including the Constellation plan to rocket humans back to the moon — and investing instead in innovative new projects. Here are some of the far-out ideas that could come to pass under the new NASA plan:

Faster space propulsion

Obama proposed devoting some of NASA's budget toward developing new spaceflight technologies, including innovative methods of space propulsion. The plans specifically call for building faster ways of moving through space so that future manned trips might not take as long, require as many resources, or expose astronauts to so much space radiation.

"Imagine trips to Mars that take weeks instead of nearly a year; people fanning out across the inner solar system, exploring the moon, asteroids and Mars nearly simultaneously in a steady stream of firsts," NASA administrator Charles Bolden said Monday in a briefing on the new plans.

Commercial spaceships

One of the most striking shifts in the proposed vision is to abandon NASA's current attempts to build a new vehicle to carry humans into space, and instead encourage private companies to develop this technology. NASA would then rely on commercial spaceships to ferry astronauts to the space station and low-Earth orbit.

"Because it's companies doing these things and they're competing against each other, the competition and fixed prices of contracts are going to drive a much higher level of efficiency and innovation than would have happened if the government just plodded along on its own," said Cornell University planetary scientist Jim Bell, president of the non-profit Planetary Society, a space-interest organization.

Two companies, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) in California and Orbital Sciences Corp. of Virginia, currently have contracts worth a combined $3.5 billion to provide unmanned cargo shipments to the International Space Station for NASA.

Space tourism and colonization

One of the possible consequences of new commercial space vehicles and new propulsion mechanisms is the chance that human civilians could travel to space in large numbers for the first time. That means that space vacations and moon hotels may not be a mere pipe dream anymore.

"I am excited to think that the development of commercial capabilities to send humans into low earth orbit will likely result in so many more earthlings being able to experience the transformative power of spaceflight," Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin said in a statement.

In his comments, Bolden echoed this sentiment.

"Imagine enabling hundreds, even thousands of people to visit or live in low-Earth orbit, while NASA firmly focuses its gaze on the cosmic horizon beyond Earth," he said.

Space gas stations

Orbital fuel depots are also set to be investigated in the new vision. Such supply stations would allow spacecraft to launch to low-Earth orbit, then rendezvous with a fuel container and load up on the extra juice they need to travel further.

Space gas stations could prove pivotal to manned trips to Mars or beyond, because reloading once in space would allow spacecraft to take on much more fuel than if they were forced to launch from Earth with all the propellant they needed.

Inflatable space houses

Another new technology mentioned in the plans for NASA is inflatable space modules. Inflatable habitats are very appealing because they would be very light to launch, but could potentially provide a flexible and useful framework for building rooms, both in orbit and on the moon or other planets.

Now that the lifetime of the International Space Station has been extended to 2020, the orbiting laboratory could possibly grow beyond current plans. It's not out of the question that new types of space modules, including inflatable rooms, could be added to the station before its tenure is up.

One company, the Las Vegas, Nev.-based firm Bigelow Aerospace, has already launched two inflatable space station module prototypes into orbit. They're still up there today.

Green aviation

The new vision also calls for NASA to invest in developing more environmentally friendly modes of air and space travel. The budget proposal allocates $20 million per year for NASA's green aviation program. Research programs will focus on reducing aircraft fuel needs, noise and carbon emissions.

"These investments will enable safer and cleaner air travel in the future," NASA deputy administrator Lori Garver said Monday.

http://www.space.com/news/nasa-far-out-plans-100201.html

I like this new NASA Plan that makes much more sense. its a shame he likes to surprise a lot of people because one minute I'm mad with him, the next I'm in love with him

 

[Vegeta897]

Thought this was going to be about legalizing weed.

Also, more like "I take it black Mr President"

 

[Raziaar]

Going back to the moon simply to go back to the moon was one of the stupidest ideas ever.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

Sounds interesting, so he's giving NASA money now or what? I think before all this propulsion technology goes over our heads, we should concentrate on a space elevator first.

 

[Remus]

Sounds good, we'll how this goes. However I'm still putting my money on the space elevator to make traveling to Earth orbit cheap and safe.

 

[unozero]

When are we getting our Space Orbit Death Ray?

 

[Dog--]

Ah this is cool, we get to see what it was like back in the 60's when they went on the moon the first time, all the hype and everything. Can't wait.

That being said it is 100% pointless, but hey - who gives a shit.

 

[Remus]

That being said it is 100% pointless, but hey - who gives a shit.

Why is it pointless?

 

[Dog--]

Why is it pointless?

I only read the first sentence and got the main idea, then couldn't think of anything right away that is useful do to it, so I just said 100% pointless.

It probably isn't pointless I dunno.

 

[The Monkey]

When will you people ever shut up about the ****ing space elevator?

 

[Remus]

When will you people ever shut up about the ****ing space elevator?

When it's built and operational.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

What's your ****ing problem you ****ing monkey. Even after it's built, it's all we'll talk about.

 

[Mellish]

Good.

All they need to do now is find mass effect technology hiding on mars and I'll be on my way to having hot Asari sex.

 

[Tollbooth Willie]

I take it black

SHOCKING REVELATION

 

[15357]

Nice.


All we need now is a sentient alien race and their resource-rich homeworld to exploit.

 

[Suicide Machine]

Nice.


All we need now is a sentient alien race and their resource-rich homeworld to exploit.

I've heard of some blue folk.

 

[Danimal]

I'm still mad at Obama tbh

 

[AJ Rimmer]

*sigh*
Yeah, commercial companies are what's gonna jumpstart the space-race...

Everything else sounds great! More space for everyone!

 

[jverne]

"Humanity is at a turning point, no longer will it be bound by the confines of the Earth. From this day i declare space exploration our primary goal as president of the United states of America!"


50 years later

 

[StarBob]

"Humanity is at a turning point, no longer will it be bound by the confines of the Earth. From this day i declare space exploration our primary goal as president of the United states of America!"


50 years later

Are you saying... they're gonna start sailing aircraft carriers on LAND!?

 

[Solaris]

The fools! They don't know what they're doing!!!

 

[Remus]

*sigh*
Yeah, commercial companies are what's gonna jumpstart the space-race...

I happen to agree with that mentality. if you look at the 20th century and what commercial companies did for air travel it becomes obvious why they think this way. However whether this will really work is another matter, but I think this is a better way than to rely on slow government funded space programs.

Also stfu Jverne, the world will be fine even 200 years from now.

 

[VirusType2]

*sigh*
Yeah, commercial companies are what's gonna jumpstart the space-race...

There are billion dollar contracts offered for developing these technologies. So yeah, I believe you can rely on private contractors to do the development.

 

[Sulkdodds]

The question is whether it will actually be any cheaper. It's still government money for the most part.

 

[VirusType2]

I think just as importantly, would the end product end up being better? Competition would be good.

 

[ríomhaire]

Well I don't know about relying on private companies. But encouraging them along with funding NASA's own programme makes sense. Competition is a good motivator.

God damn it VirusType2 you beat me too it!

 

[Sulkdodds]

I think just as importantly, would the end product end up being better? Competition would be good.

Or it could be a narrow and ineffective cost-cutting exercise aimed at delivering the minimum project for the maximum handout.

Hey, it's what happens over here.

EDIT: I actually agree that private enterprise could be a very good way to get into space. It's just that I'm not convinced of the US government's capability or willingness to properly harness it. In the UK the way privatisation is set up has been historically antithetical to actual monetary savings or actual qualitative improvement., presumably because corporations have tended to be hostile to deals which would really benefit the country rather than simply benefiting them.

 

[Krynn72]

"Humanity is at a turning point, no longer will it be bound by the confines of the Earth. From this day i declare space exploration our primary goal as president of the United states of America!"


50 years later

Good to know Bethesda will still be around to paint the landscapes, its just too bad they will think its 2007 when its really 2050.

 

[AJ Rimmer]

However whether this will really work is another matter, but I think this is a better way than to rely on slow government funded space programs.

Government flights since 1961 has put 500 people in space. Commercial flights since 1961: 2 people. Oh those slow-moving government space programs...

 

[VirusType2]

Or it could be a narrow and ineffective cost-cutting exercise aimed at delivering the minimum project for the maximum handout.

Hey, it's what happens over here.

EDIT: I actually agree that private enterprise could be a very good way to get into space. It's just that I'm not convinced of the US government's capability or willingness to properly harness it. In the UK the way privatisation is set up has been historically antithetical to actual monetary savings or actual qualitative improvement., presumably because corporations have tended to be hostile to deals which would really benefit the country rather than simply benefiting them.

I believe that the private contractors need to deliver what has been asked of them or they get nothing.

Further assumptions would be that it's a competition - the government picks the best ideas, and only buys those. So, cost cutting in the extreme, along with getting vastly different approaches and solutions.

Or I could be completely wrong.

Government flights since 1961 has put 500 people in space. Commercial flights since 1961: 2 people. Oh those slow-moving government space programs...

I think that's some pretty biased data you're basing your viewpoint on.

2004, may be the first step for commercial space travel

 

[AJ Rimmer]

I think that's some pretty biased data you're basing your viewpoint on.

Okay then.

1961-1967, the advent of manned spaceflight: 23 human beings are sent into space.
2004-2010, the advent of commercial manned spaceflight: 2 human beings are sent into space. Barely. And this was 43 years after they proved it was possible.

if you look at the 20th century and what commercial companies did for air travel it becomes obvious why they think this way

Air planes actually go somewhere. If they could only go to the antarctic commercial interests would have been alot more lackluster.

 

[Maestro]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget

Considering that adjusted for inflation the Apollo Program peaked at 33,000,000,000 dollar budget in 1965, and the fact that we're talking tens of millions of dollars available to upstarts to build from scratch, it remains unsurprising that they have only sent two to space. Should I also point out most of that money has been in the last 3 years?

It's been proven time and again that government agencies always get left in the dust, the only reason NASA has ever achieved anything great is they have ENORMOUS funding.

 

[Remus]

Air planes actually go somewhere. If they could only go to the antarctic commercial interests would have been alot more lackluster.

Implying that there's no interest and/or profits can't be made from traveling to Earth orbit and the Moon. /facepalm

 

[AJ Rimmer]

Considering that adjusted for inflation the Apollo Program peaked at 33,000,000,000 dollar budget in 1965, and the fact that we're talking tens of millions of dollars available to upstarts to build from scratch, it remains unsurprising that they have only sent two to space. Should I also point out most of that money has been in the last 3 years?

You people keep making my point for me by basically saying "It's not surprising it's taking the commercial companies so long, since it isn't profitable for them." That's exactly what I'm saying! There's no point to go to space for a private company at present, or in the foreseeable future! There is a point in launching satellites, and they do. But who is it that actually sends those ****ers up? Oh look, it's NASA, ESA and Roskosmos, and a handful of private companies using governmentally owned launch complexes. And even those private companies are partially owned by government agencies.

It's been proven time and again that government agencies always get left in the dust, the only reason NASA has ever achieved anything great is they have ENORMOUS funding.

Really? Is the US guarded by the watchful eyes of US Marines Inc? Is the NYPD a private enterprise?

Also, NASA has 0.5% of the current federal budget. And is the only government agency which regularly turns a profit.

Implying that there's no interest and/or profits can't be made from traveling to Earth orbit and the Moon. /facepalm

Not for private companies, no. Not at present.

 

[VirusType2]

Inflatable space houses

Space gas stations

Green aviation

Commercial spaceships

Space tourism and colonization (low earth orbit)

Faster space propulsion

None of these new contracts are even about maned spaceflight, well with the exception of one, which is low earth orbit. But if that's the only thing you find important about space, then I can understand your disappointment.

Anyway, if there wasn't before, the incentive is there now with these new contracts.

 

[Remus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MegUVzFiqR4

 

[DEATHMASTER]

I doubt that'll be the only thing going up to it. There would be huge ass lifts for cargo and shit too.

 

[pvtbones]

I also sincerely doubt it'll travelled that quickly as the video wishes to imply.

 

[Danimal]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw

 

[DEATHMASTER]

tl;dw