The sound and fury over a NASA authorization bill

[Disir]

When the bipartisan leadership of the House Science Committee introduced a NASA authorization bill Jan. 24, it surprised many people in the civil space community. The bill appeared to reject the goal of NASA’s Artemis program to return humans to the moon by 2024, requiring instead a return only by 2028. It also spurned NASA’s approach for using public-private partnerships for building a lunar lander in favor of a more conventional government-led approach, and minimized activities at the moon to just those needed for a later human mission to Mars.

The bill got a sharp reaction from NASA. “It’s fairly prescriptive. We would like more flexibilities on what we do on the surface of the moon and flexibilities in how we do our contracting,” NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said in an interview a few days after the bill’s release.

The bill’s sponsors say it’s not their intent to block a 2024 return to the moon. “Let me be crystal clear: this bill is not about rejecting the Artemis program or delaying humans on the moon until 2028,” said Rep. Kendra Horn (D-Okla.), chair of the space subcommittee and lead sponsor of the bill, during a Jan. 29 markup of the bill that made only minor changes to it.

Since that markup, debate over the bill has faded as work to refine it continues. “It represents to me a positive bipartisan first step, but it’s in the middle of its own process,” Jim Morhard, NASA deputy administrator, said of the bill at a Space Transportation Association luncheon Feb. 19.
Foust Forward | The sound and fury over a NASA authorization bill - SpaceNews.com

I'm not sure that I understand why it would not be finished by the end of the year.

 

[fncceo]

As much as I hate this to be true, NASA is dead. There is no reason for publicly funded manned space flight any longer.

It's been 50 years since manned flight left LEO and there is no reason to start it up again.

 

[Fed Starving]

The politics are too complex when you track the conception of missions through to the completion of them. Too much cancelling, back to the drawing board, secrecy and etcetera. When the private sector takes space and the military sector starts patrolling and making national claims you will see NASA greatly reduced for being redundant. Private companies will be far more efficient and timely and attract the larger portion of the talent, leaving NASA as the "poor man's alternative".

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Send an unmanned Probe to the oceans of Europa

 

[HenryBHough]

No point in sending a probe to The U.S. House of Representatives in search of intelligent life......

 

[22lcidw]

For what the taxpayer has paid for NASA we should be much further advanced when it comes to human spaceflight. Companies gouging us for decades and more. Politics of having parts made in every state if possible. Driving the costs up. Plenty of qualified people work for NASA. But the great ones have been reduced due to PC and quotas. Its like a minefield for NASA top management to get from point A to point B. And I can see why they would want to see something pushed. For there has been many different ideas in the last 25 years or so before we settled on a space capsule design that was originally part of a Mars exploration possibility. Reality is,that we are not going to Mars for 30 billion dollars. The toilet alone will cost that. Going to the moon is possible. But then again the minefield is there.

 

[eagle1462010]

NASA has done wonderful things................Stuff like the Microwave...........disease studies in a vacuum and such........better understanding of the weather............so I'm not all for cutting them to the bone.........Didn't like it when they got rid of the shuttle program with nothing to replace it........

We now have to thumb a ride to get to the Space Station.

 

[jackflash]

When the bipartisan leadership of the House Science Committee introduced a NASA authorization bill Jan. 24, it surprised many people in the civil space community. The bill appeared to reject the goal of NASA’s Artemis program to return humans to the moon by 2024, requiring instead a return only by 2028. It also spurned NASA’s approach for using public-private partnerships for building a lunar lander in favor of a more conventional government-led approach, and minimized activities at the moon to just those needed for a later human mission to Mars.

The bill got a sharp reaction from NASA. “It’s fairly prescriptive. We would like more flexibilities on what we do on the surface of the moon and flexibilities in how we do our contracting,” NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said in an interview a few days after the bill’s release.

The bill’s sponsors say it’s not their intent to block a 2024 return to the moon. “Let me be crystal clear: this bill is not about rejecting the Artemis program or delaying humans on the moon until 2028,” said Rep. Kendra Horn (D-Okla.), chair of the space subcommittee and lead sponsor of the bill, during a Jan. 29 markup of the bill that made only minor changes to it.

Since that markup, debate over the bill has faded as work to refine it continues. “It represents to me a positive bipartisan first step, but it’s in the middle of its own process,” Jim Morhard, NASA deputy administrator, said of the bill at a Space Transportation Association luncheon Feb. 19.
Foust Forward | The sound and fury over a NASA authorization bill - SpaceNews.com

I'm not sure that I understand why it would not be finished by the end of the year.

The Chinese were bombing the Mongols with rockets around the 10th century. Rockets are simply a crude expen$ive & inefficent delivery system. Rockets are just a fuel tank with a venturi discharge system(carburetor). NASA's boys have been making the $$$$$ off the taxpayers for $ure by using outdated WW2 technology @ best that gives a one time launch @ a stupendous co$t. I was launching Estes brand rockets I purchased from hobby stores back in the mid 60's. At least the Estes rockets I was launching did not cost the taxpayer 100 million $$$$$ a launch.

 

[San Souci]

No point in sending a probe to The U.S. House of Representatives in search of intelligent life......

Good points. Pelosi sucks. No intelligent life there.