Sounding the Death Knell for NASA Constellation...

[Boggy1 45]

 Remember the Constellation Programme? The massive programme introduced by George Bush as part of his Vision for Space Exploration has had its funding cut, effectively cancelling the programme, in the first of Obama's annual budget for 2011. 

The Constellation Programme was to be the successor to the Space Shuttle Programme; which has served NASA for over two decades. The remaining three Space Shuttles, Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavour, are all due to be retired and decommissioned by November of this year. 

Constellation was intended to be the replacement. The new Ares rocket was to lift both cargo and astronauts into space, and, through the use of the new Orion capsule; to eventually return and land on the Moon after a hiatus of nearly four decades. 

Now all of that seems to have come to an end.

The Constellation Programme, which was fraught with budget overruns ($9 billion already spent) and massive delays has been officially cancelled by Obama, stating it to be "over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation".

However, Obama has promised a $6 billion increase in NASA funding over the next five years, which will be split into funding robotic and probe-based missions to other planets, new orbital telescopes, and pure scientific research. 

$600 million of this budget will be going to the International Space Station, it too behind schedule, so as to keep it operational past 2016 for at least four more years. There were plans to de-orbit and destroy the Space Station sometime in the late 2020s, due to lack of funds, only a few years after it's completion. Thankfully; this now probably will not happen. 

But what is going to happen to manned American flights to space? NASA has just under a year to either develop an entirely new way to get astronauts into space, or find ways to keep the Shuttles going for longer. Both of these options seem unrealistic; so it could very well be that NASA will be borrowing Russian Soyuz rockets to reach the Space Station.

As for the Moon; it does mean another delay in stepping foot back onto it. But, with the rapid development of the Chinese and Indian space programmes; it is very possible that the first people on the moon in the 21st century will be from Asia; not the America

Obama does want far greater private involvement in space flight; so we may see private companies such as Space-X putting people into space before NASA has a chance to redevelop it's manned flight programme. This may free up NASA to concentrate on pure research and discovery; something which is bound to excite scientists.

In any case; its a vast shakeup of NASA, and for the whole of the American space programme. 

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/01/president-obamas-nasa-budget-unveiled/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8489097.stm

[astronelson 339]

Qui audet adipiscitur - Who Dares Wins.

When we do not try to reach out beyond what we know, when we do not try to chase our dreams, when we do not try to do what we know we can, we have truly failed. Trying and not succeeding shows us how we can get further, do better and finally succeed; not trying at all gives us nothing.

I was rather looking forward to going back to the moon. I missed the Apollo program by being born several decades too late.

[hmm 17]

I think that this is a good idea, canceling the constellation program. I think that it was too rushed and hastily put together. I don't know much about the technical specs of the program, but from what i read it seemed like a revamped version of the Apollo rocket series, however with better navigation and computing technology equipped. To me its comparable to driving around a beat up 1970's Crown Vic, however you installed a brand new JBL stereo system in the trunk and an alpine LCD display with GPS navigation, and you call it a new car.

With this new budget NASA will be forced to sit down and think about how to best get our astronauts back into space. America already made it to the moon and back first, let some other country have a chance, its not like china could take that title away from the US by getting there second. If your going to do something do it right, don't put these astronauts in an even more perilous situation, just for the sake of getting people in space first... again. 

[Easy Bakes 253]

this opens it up for Space Ship 2

A shame realy. Science loses again

[Duke87 1,070]

The silly part is that this isn't a budget cut. NASA's budget stands to increase by half a billion dollars in spite of axing Constellation. So much for the fiscal responsibility angle...

Oh, and by the way, NASA still only acounts for a little more than half a percent of the federal budget. So, it's small fry. There are far more effective places to cut costs out there.

[chicah 20]

I think there's no point getting all angry over this. We've been at the moon already, it's not like it changed much.

Even though NASA gets more funding, it is a budget cut in the sense that they can use their new money to do whatever they want - and not spend money on this. Obama is right; it was rushed, badly planned and is far behind schedule. Of course, I think he should rather cut military funding, but I know what a heated issue that is in the US.

He's right about this; America can not continue spending money like debt doesn't exist, like it doesn't have consequences. You seem to have gotten your first somewhat economically reasonable president in a while.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

NASA needed a boot in the behind. It has been messing around with rocketry since the end of World War II and the time for playing with these toys is past. The private sector is ready and willing to take over this aspect of putting man into space.

What NASA needs to do now is to put its efforts into research into new propulsion systems and, gasp, some pure science. A lot of their budget could easily go to the Universities as grants for some deep research. We need some more work on relativity-based propulsion systems, and I doubt the bureaucrabs at NASA have the imagination for that as they have not progressed beyond Newtonian mechanics.

[hym 358]

Originally posted by: N_O_Body

NASA needed a boot in the behind. It has been messing around with rocketry since the end of World War II and the time for playing with these toys is past. The private sector is ready and willing to take over this aspect of putting man into space.quote>

Combustion rockets have also been about the only thing that provided enough thrust.  Everything else is either still in the lab while people try to understand how to make it work, or it works but doesn't provide enough thrust to escape the earth's gravitational pull.

What NASA needs to do now is to put its efforts into research into new propulsion systems and, gasp, some pure science. A lot of their budget could easily go to the Universities as grants for some deep research. We need some more work on relativity-based propulsion systems, and I doubt the bureaucrabs at NASA have the imagination for that as they have not progressed beyond Newtonian mechanics.quote>

Unless NASA suddenly figures how to fold space-time over itself, that won't be happening anytime in the near future, if it ever happens at all.  The problem isn't just NASA, but parts of the scientific community as a whole.  A handful of physicists are preparing to begin studies on a 1930's theory that could provide a solution to the problem of flying faster than light (assuming it works of course).  What those physicists are getting for their suggestion that the theory be tested is a bunch of dismissals from other physicists.

[Patricius Maximus 236]

The budget destroys any semblance of human progress that was left from the US government. Having private companies sucking government money like vampires taxi the astronauts to low earth orbit in unsafe vehicles to wave their arms at the Chinese lunar base is no way to go.

Humankind must progress, not regress. We must explore in order to survive as a species, and I am sure that most members of said species would agree.

[morriswalters 16]

I'm for whatever works.  But we're putting all our eggs in one very shakey basket.  The first three tests of the Falcon 1 failed and they have flown only five times.  The Falcon 9 was origionally supposed to have flown in January, this is February so if it did fly I missed it.  This would be it's first launch.  The Dragon cargo/manned module is slated to fly three times this year but hasn't flown yet.  Rutan's Spaceship 2 is a suborbital craft  and not able to carry cargo, as far as I know.  Nobody else has flown.  So if it works and if they can hold schedule then SpaceX may be a good solution.  On the other hand if it doesn't work for some reason or if some unanticipated flaw is discovered this could turn into a very ugly snafu.  The only man capable launch systems going forward which have any track record outside the Shuttle are the Russians and the Chinese.  And the Russians are the only people who have a reliable enough vehicle to to maintain a schedule of launches needed for the ISS.  So for all you free marketeers out there, you've talked the talk,  now you gotta walk the walk.  I hope your right.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

The budget destroys any semblance of human progress that was left from the US government. Having private companies sucking government money like vampires taxi the astronauts to low earth orbit in unsafe vehicles to wave their arms at the Chinese lunar base is no way to go.

Humankind must progress, not regress. We must explore in order to survive as a species, and I am sure that most members of said species would agree.quote>

To be honest, does it matter  if its the Chinese or Japan or The US or a Private company who keeps the  dream alive?

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

The budget destroys any semblance of human progress that was left from the US government. Having private companies sucking government money like vampires taxi the astronauts to low earth orbit in unsafe vehicles to wave their arms at the Chinese lunar base is no way to go.

Humankind must progress, not regress. We must explore in order to survive as a species, and I am sure that most members of said species would agree.quote>

To be honest, does it matter

[hamsterTK 93]

well will there ever be propulsion systems that aren't fuel-based? I was thinking how cool it would be to have crafts that follow invisible "rails" of beamed energy

Sorry, its just that ever since Simcity 2000 and 3000 had microwave power recievers I've thought such a thing would be so cool in real life. Somewhere in California they apparently were successful at it too.

And I'm glad India and China want to get into space. To me its not really politics, just humanity and science advancing. Maybe that's a really sci-fi kind of way to think but who cares.