Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
NASA bombshell: Government agency admits it can't pay for humans to go to Mars
Topic Started: Jul 14 2017, 11:58 AM (765 Views)
Demagogue
Member Avatar
Administrator
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/07/14/nasa-bombshell-government-agency-admits-it-cant-pay-for-humans-to-go-to-mars.html

NASA has long said it would be able to send a manned mission to Mars, sometime during the 2030s. Now, in a bombshell announcement, the space agency has admitted it can't afford the price tag.

On July 12, during a propulsion meeting of the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics, NASA's William Gerstenmaier, the agency's chief of human spaceflight, said the funds just are not there for a mission

"I can't put a date on humans on Mars, and the reason really is ... at the budget levels we described, this roughly 2 percent increase, we don't have the surface systems available for Mars," Gerstenmaier said, according to an Ars Technica report. "And that entry, descent and landing is a huge challenge for us for Mars."
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

The moon makes more sense anyway - better science in my opinon.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Demagogue
Member Avatar
Administrator
I don't remember who I was talking to the other day (may have been Cautionary Tales or Tsal) but I essentially said what the NASA folks just admitted to. As we currently fund things we can not afford a government program to send men to mars. Sending men to the moon was fabulously expensive and we lost the ability to do massive projects like that due to funding wars and social programs.

Putting men on Mars would be the modern technical and financial equivalent of sending men to the moon in the 1960's. The difference between now and then is the simple fact that our government now provides many, many more services to the people that were once wholly private or not provided at all. Massive defense spending on wars does not help either.
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

I still think Obama made the right decision. Focus on robotic missions to explore outer limits and planets. They are cheaper and provide huge volumes of useful data.

Manned missions are not necessary any more beyond the fact we can do it (at a price) and man will collect a bit different data and have direct experience over a robot. But is the price tag worth the 10% more data we collect?

I suspect in a year or two Trump will come to the same conclusion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Demagogue
Jul 14 2017, 12:02 PM
I don't remember who I was talking to the other day (may have been Cautionary Tales or Tsal) but I essentially said what the NASA folks just admitted to. As we currently fund things we can not afford a government program to send men to mars. Sending men to the moon was fabulously expensive and we lost the ability to do massive projects like that due to funding wars and social programs.

Putting men on Mars would be the modern technical and financial equivalent of sending men to the moon in the 1960's. The difference between now and then is the simple fact that our government now provides many, many more services to the people that were once wholly private or not provided at all. Massive defense spending on wars does not help either.
I think the danger is much higher as well. Any vessel that gets shredded by radiation or micrometeorites - or stranded on Mars will end public support of such programs for generations.

Build a radio telescope on the dark side of the moon, see if there is potential with Helium 3 - all while colonizing a pressurized lava tube.

There is so much to do on the moon that we can wait for mars.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tsalagi
Member Avatar

estonianman
Jul 14 2017, 12:02 PM
The moon makes more sense anyway - better science in my opinon.
Been there, done that...no purpose to it

Addendum: Only with the caveat that we would go to actually colonize it. any number of projects done on the moon make sense.
Edited by Tsalagi, Jul 14 2017, 12:28 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
estonianman
Member Avatar

Tsalagi
Jul 14 2017, 12:25 PM
estonianman
Jul 14 2017, 12:02 PM
The moon makes more sense anyway - better science in my opinon.
Been there, done that...no purpose to it

Addendum: Only with the caveat that we would go to actually colonize it. any number of projects done on the moon make sense.
See my last post.
Edited by estonianman, Jul 14 2017, 12:32 PM.
MEEK AND MILD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

A really, really big rail cannon would would efficiently send people on a one way trip to Mars............ :)
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Coast2coast

The moon, Mars - we will go again..... in fear.

What motivated the space race in the sixties will motivate a new space race as China in the not to distant future advances their space program.

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drudge X
Member Avatar

China is the future owner of Mars.
Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Coast2coast

Drudge X
Jul 15 2017, 03:43 AM
China is the future owner of Mars.
What makes you think I am willing to sell?

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

We got Moon rocks.....China is more than welcome to collect Mars rocks............ :lol:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tsalagi
Member Avatar

Drudge X
Jul 15 2017, 03:43 AM
China is the future owner of Mars.
Well....good news is that when we finally get there, we'll be able to find a place for good sweet and sour pork and lo Mein noodles.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
70-101
Member Avatar

Drudge X
Jul 15 2017, 03:43 AM
China is the future owner of Mars.
Not likely. If anyone is leading in the race for Mars its the Europeans and especially the Dutch. In 2018, a Euro lander would be sent to the planet as a trial-run to test some of the technologies that the real mission will need.

That will also be accompanied by a communications satellite to beam messages back and forth. In 2020, with Russians support a rover will be sent to the red planet who's job will be to confirm a good landing site, check the martian soil for moisture content, sunlight concentrations and perform a host of other scientific experiments in anticipation of the 2022 landing of the first humans. A few months before humans land on Mars six cargo carrying missions will land on Mars to provided the needed life sustaining supplies.

Guess how it will all be funded...

A live 24/7 reality TV show, that's how.

With a six minute time delay. Which is expected for more than pay for the mission, and occasional resupply missions.

But make no mistake, once humans are on the planet there will be no returning.
Edited by 70-101, Jul 15 2017, 07:43 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dr345
Member Avatar

Mars covered in toxic chemicals that can wipe out living organisms, tests reveal

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jul/06/mars-covered-in-toxic-chemicals-that-can-wipe-out-living-organisms-tests-reveal
un jour on se souviendra de ca comme on se souvient de ca
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
peewee

Demagogue
Jul 14 2017, 11:58 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/07/14/nasa-bombshell-government-agency-admits-it-cant-pay-for-humans-to-go-to-mars.html

NASA has long said it would be able to send a manned mission to Mars, sometime during the 2030s. Now, in a bombshell announcement, the space agency has admitted it can't afford the price tag.

On July 12, during a propulsion meeting of the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics, NASA's William Gerstenmaier, the agency's chief of human spaceflight, said the funds just are not there for a mission

"I can't put a date on humans on Mars, and the reason really is ... at the budget levels we described, this roughly 2 percent increase, we don't have the surface systems available for Mars," Gerstenmaier said, according to an Ars Technica report. "And that entry, descent and landing is a huge challenge for us for Mars."
Why is it important for anyone to travel to Mars within even within the next century?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Attaburnsinhell

The Earth is the only known planet in the known universe with the ability to support life. All the rest of the planets in our solar system are failed planets, positioned in the wrong place - either too close or too far from the sun

The system that heats and cools the earth is three parts. The tilt of the axis gives us winter to summer, the 24 hour rotation gives us night cooling and day warmth. The third is the amount of CO2 in the atmoshere

The elements that make up our atmosphere are nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, and CO2. Unlike the first three elements, CO2 is the only one that absorbs heat because it is carbon based. CO2 is measured in parts per million, ppm, meaning out of a million molecules.

For thousands of years the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere averaged around 250-275ppm, which occured naturally. We know this from ice core samples taken from Greenland and Antarctica. This is the reason Earth has been able to support life as we know it and allowed us to grow food

But what scientists have discovered from these core samples has been a rapid increase of the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in the last 100 years, going from 270ppm to amounts as high as 400ppm. That increased amount is due to human pollution,which leaves a carbon finger print that scientists can specifically identify.

So when a denier says ''sure the planet is warming, but we dont know if it's due to human activity'' thats a bald faced lie, because we know exactly what the additional 100+ ppm is made up of -airborne pollutants

CO2 is carbon based, as in coal. We have launched billions of tons of heated coal into the air and the Earth can not absorb it enough to properly cool the planet
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robertr2000
Member Avatar

Humans have been to Mars. We're there now.
"if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

Robertr2000
Jul 15 2017, 02:20 PM
Humans have been to Mars. We're there now.
Do you mean we had the "race to Mars" and no one noticed ???...............
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
70-101
Member Avatar

peewee
Jul 15 2017, 09:28 AM
Demagogue
Jul 14 2017, 11:58 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/07/14/nasa-bombshell-government-agency-admits-it-cant-pay-for-humans-to-go-to-mars.html

NASA has long said it would be able to send a manned mission to Mars, sometime during the 2030s. Now, in a bombshell announcement, the space agency has admitted it can't afford the price tag.

On July 12, during a propulsion meeting of the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics, NASA's William Gerstenmaier, the agency's chief of human spaceflight, said the funds just are not there for a mission

"I can't put a date on humans on Mars, and the reason really is ... at the budget levels we described, this roughly 2 percent increase, we don't have the surface systems available for Mars," Gerstenmaier said, according to an Ars Technica report. "And that entry, descent and landing is a huge challenge for us for Mars."
Why is it important for anyone to travel to Mars within even within the next century?
Well, when you considered NASA recently estimated farming the giant asteroid '16 Psyche' is worth about 10,000 quadrillion dollars, I say it was for profit. Make no mistake, asteroid miming well be a vast and highly profitable endeavor, once we have the ability to do so; give it fifty years, perhaps less.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com DOMESTIC U.S. news · Next Topic »
Add Reply