Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
FACT: NASAs total budget is less than 1% of the Federal spending. Way less than 1%. FACT: The proposed fiscal year 2013 budget out of the White House has huge cuts to NASA. Planetary sciences alone has $300 million slashed from it.
FACT: If this cut stays in the budget, NASA will have to pull back from some big and exciting planetary missions. Its already made NASA back out of an agreement with the European Space Agency on two ambitious Mars probes.
FACT: This sucks. A lot. America leads the way in scientific planetary missions, and this cut will hurt that, significantly.
This again?
What is it you people on the right find so bad about shifting space programs from the public to the private sector?
There's just no pleasing you people, is there?
A private spaceship is preparing to link up with the International Space Station for the first time Friday in a historic step for commercial spaceflight.
The unmanned Dragon capsule, built by Space Exploration Technologies Corp., or SpaceX, is due to arrive at the station early Friday and be attached to an open docking port, becoming the first spacecraft built by a company — and not a national space program — ever to do so.
Dragon is one of two commercial vehicles being nurtured by NASA to replace the cargo-carrying duties of the retired space shuttles (the other spacecraft is the Cygnus, built by Orbital Sciences Corp., of Dulles, Va.). This flight is a test mission sponsored by the agency's COTS program (Commercial Orbital Transportation Services).
If the current mission goes smoothly, SpaceX will be cleared to begin flying delivery missions to the space station starting this fall. The company is contracted for at least 12 of these flights for a total of $1.6 billion.
This again?
What is it you people on the right find so bad about shifting space programs from the public to the private sector?
There's just no pleasing you people, is there?
Shifting parts of the space program to the private sector ( transportation of cargo/crew) is fine and I approve completely. But that's all that has been shifted. The rest is simply being underfunded into hibernation.
This again?
What is it you people on the right find so bad about shifting space programs from the public to the private sector?
There's just no pleasing you people, is there?
Shifting parts of the space program to the private sector ( transportation of cargo/crew) is fine and I approve completely. But that's all that has been shifted. The rest is simply being underfunded into hibernation.
Right now I would rather pay for other things than a mission to mars.
Shifting parts of the space program to the private sector ( transportation of cargo/crew) is fine and I approve completely. But that's all that has been shifted. The rest is simply being underfunded into hibernation.
Right now I would rather pay for other things than a mission to mars.
depends on what those things are. The space program creates a lot of jobs, and not ust with NASA. Contractors, etc.
I expect rdean will come in here and blame Bush, but the rest of us can call up our congresscritters and let them know we support NASA.
FACT: NASAs total budget is less than 1% of the Federal spending. Way less than 1%. FACT: The proposed fiscal year 2013 budget out of the White House has huge cuts to NASA. Planetary sciences alone has $300 million slashed from it.
FACT: If this cut stays in the budget, NASA will have to pull back from some big and exciting planetary missions. Its already made NASA back out of an agreement with the European Space Agency on two ambitious Mars probes.
FACT: This sucks. A lot. America leads the way in scientific planetary missions, and this cut will hurt that, significantly.
Shining shoes for NASA | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine
Shifting parts of the space program to the private sector ( transportation of cargo/crew) is fine and I approve completely. But that's all that has been shifted. The rest is simply being underfunded into hibernation.
Right now I would rather pay for other things than a mission to mars.
depends on what those things are. The space program creates a lot of jobs, and not ust with NASA. Contractors, etc.
Shifting parts of the space program to the private sector ( transportation of cargo/crew) is fine and I approve completely. But that's all that has been shifted. The rest is simply being underfunded into hibernation.
I can understand spending money the development of the space around our planet, even our moon and maybe Mars. But anything beyond that, until they can find a way to FOLD SPACE or TIME TRAVEL or some other means to cover VAST regions of the universe in a timely fashion, it's just a waste of money.
I can understand spending money the development of the space around our planet, even our moon and maybe Mars. But anything beyond that, until they can find a way to FOLD SPACE or TIME TRAVEL or some other means to cover VAST regions of the universe in a timely fashion, it's just a waste of money.
I can understand spending money the development of the space around our planet, even our moon and maybe Mars. But anything beyond that, until they can find a way to FOLD SPACE or TIME TRAVEL or some other means to cover VAST regions of the universe in a timely fashion, it's just a waste of money.
How can they do that if they are not funded? Most private industry isnt going to venture into those areas when there is so much money to be made just tooling around our own area.
NASA probably needs to be reorganized to partner with the private sector on ambitious ventures. NASA is govt and thereby extremely wasteful.
How can they do that if they are not funded? Most private industry isnt going to venture into those areas when there is so much money to be made just tooling around our own area.
NASA probably needs to be reorganized to partner with the private sector on ambitious ventures. NASA is govt and thereby extremely wasteful.
Right now I would rather pay for other things than a mission to mars.
depends on what those things are. The space program creates a lot of jobs, and not ust with NASA. Contractors, etc.
What qualifies as "a lot" for you?
NASA jobs in FL, TX, AL... contractors all over the country... workers around the NASA areas from hotels, restaurants, etc.
Here are a few links:
Obama administration kills 23K space-related jobs in Florida. | RedState
End of shuttle program slams Space Coast economy - USATODAY.com
The End Of The Space Shuttle Program Hurts Houston Pride And Economy
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center cuts spending and up to 300 more jobs in Huntsville | al.com
NASA Contractor Cutting Jobs After Shuttle Retirement - Space News - redOrbit
Shifting parts of the space program to the private sector ( transportation of cargo/crew) is fine and I approve completely. But that's all that has been shifted. The rest is simply being underfunded into hibernation.
The private sector is stepping in to fill the gap.
And there has been a bunch of recent government funding devoting to helping this along.
So, help me out here...
Is it that the private sector isn't moving fast enough?
Or is it that you feel the government does a better job than the private sector?
NASA jobs in FL, TX, AL... contractors all over the country... workers around the NASA areas from hotels, restaurants, etc.
Here are a few links:
Obama administration kills 23K space-related jobs in Florida. | RedState
End of shuttle program slams Space Coast economy - USATODAY.com
The End Of The Space Shuttle Program Hurts Houston Pride And Economy
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center cuts spending and up to 300 more jobs in Huntsville | al.com
NASA Contractor Cutting Jobs After Shuttle Retirement - Space News - redOrbit
I'm sure Medicaid employs a lot of people too.
But I don't think you'd be saying the same thing if their funding got cut...
