Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

should private industry/private business take a part in space exploration?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 13 2004 @ 08:07 PM
link   
it seems to me (and most of you ATSers) that space exploration is a "tool" used by presidents/rulers to get attention or a quick vote. this to me makes me feel bothered. i am bothered at the presidents/rulers (not pointing fingers) for using space exploration only as a "tool" because it is so inportant to humanity to go past all limits...

this leads to my question: should private industry/private business take a part in space exploration?

this would limit the possibilities of using space exploration only as "tools". private industries/private businesses would have no need for these "tools" and they would contribute to the entire human race by going past all barriers.

i say private industries/private businesses SHOULD take part in the exploration of space.

what do YOU think...





posted on May, 14 2004 @ 05:22 PM
link   
does any body have an answer???

come on people i need replies!





posted on May, 14 2004 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Absolutely, private industry should take a major role in space exploration. From my political standpoint, moving anything from government to private industry is a step in the right direction. The bureaucracy of government creates inefficiencies and as you mentioned, most things under government control become political tools, pawns used to ensure a senator's long political career.
For example, the ISS has well surpassed its budget, and many scientists claim that its contribution to science won't be worth nearly the cost. It's being completed as a means to a political end (international collaboration and all that).
The X-Prize has proven that private industry can raise the finances necessary to develop space vehicles, and I have every confidence that they can come up with a better product than NASA could in the same time for the same amount of money.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 05:48 PM
link   
I would personaly see every human being taking a part of space exploration in one way or the other..
First I like to see a Moslim a Christen and a Jew hand in hand on the moon. And shown on all broadcast on every television and other news media to show every human no matter what religion what can do as humans.
and if privat entrepeneurs can be a part of this Yes . because space leads to peace. religion can be but taken in historical prospectif it will lead to trouble confrontations and war.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Private industry is in the process of taking over right now. NASA has dropped the ball and Private industry will pick it up and run with it, wherever it may lead. As we all talk about this the first Private Astronaught is fast approaching. X-Prize contestant Scaled Compisites today announced that it has set a new record on their 3rd powered test flight here is the link and quote.






Chalk up another booming flight of the privately-backed SpaceShipOne, the piloted rocket plane designed to soar to the edge of space and glide to a runway landing.

With pilot Mike Melvill at the controls -- following release from the White Knight turbojet-powered launch aircraft high above the Mojave, California desert -- SpaceShipOne punched through the sky today boosted by a hybrid propellant rocket motor.

Scaled Composites of Mojave is the builder of SpaceShipOne, an effort led by aviation innovator, Burt Rutan. The financial backer of the project is Microsoft mogul, Paul Allen.

In a post-flight statement from the company, the SpaceShipOne team reported that their space plane flew to 212,000 feet altitude, almost 41 miles. NASA awards astronaut status to anyone who flies above 50 miles in altitude.


Source...here



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Privatization of space flight will never happen. Not in any grand way. Not for a long time anyways. There are many reasons but the first and obvious is money, it's too expensive.

NASA's budget for going to the Moon? 40 Billion dollars. What company generates such profits to afford such costs?



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 02:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
Privatization of space flight will never happen. Not in any grand way. Not for a long time anyways. There are many reasons but the first and obvious is money, it's too expensive.

NASA's budget for going to the Moon? 40 Billion dollars. What company generates such profits to afford such costs?




Yes, 40 billion dollars is a signifigant amount of money, for any organization - public, private, or government. However, doesn't the recent milestone of a private company reaching space for a fraction of the cost NASA requires lead one to believe that in the near future (10 or so years) private companies/industry will find a way to do it cheaper, faster, and better?

There have to be (and this is my own personal speculation) exploitable resources out there in space that will entice companies to reach for the stars. I'm basing this assertation on the fact that lands on the unknown side of many frontiers in the past have yeilded great rewards for those with the desire, ability, and balls to go there (think about the first humans trekking to better farming/grazing lands, about renaissance sailors finding the Americas, about drilling for oil hundreds of miles out to sea.) Where there is a will there is a way, and I for one believe in the entrepreneurial spirit of Americans, but more so in the insatiable thirst homo sapiens have for knowledge.

As far as attracting the intellectual capital to get there, I believe it will snowball from government and academic institutions to private companies. In other words, the financial and laboratory incentives to go to private companies will be small at first, but some will make the jump. As these pioneers make progress more funding will become available thus leading to more incentive and compesation for those with superior talents in their respective fields.


However, the question at hand is not whether we could but whether we should let private companies go into space. I happen to agree with they see ALL as space exploration has been a pet project of governments for various reasons other than simply scientific knowledge and general achievement. Putting space exploration in the hands of private companies will take that pawn away from governments.



[Edited on 15-5-2004 by hopblaze]



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 03:01 AM
link   
not only should private companies and industries have a role, their role should be primary with the government taking a back seat.

with private companies and indutries they are using their money and they are trying to reach a certain goal and will try to do it whilemaking a profit, which means being EFFICIENT. NASA is using outdated vehicles given the current level of technology. they use an extremely heavy craft which uses fuel that is put in tanks that are large than the shuttle itself! this was fine back in the 70's and 80's when they were first doing this but its time to go with a better smaller more efficient designed craft.

as i said in the other thread discussing this you can use smaller craft for smaller projects (say for transporting people to and from the space station) bu use bigger craft only when the need arises (like adding a unit ont the space station itself). it wouldnt be THAT difficult to have three different size platform vehicles, small medium and large. most of the time they do maintenance and only a small craft is needed but what have they been using? a bloated heavy inefficient craft for ALL of their needs.

if they only need to do maintenance work and maybe trans port some people to and from the space station and they use a small craft for this and it costs a fraction of what it would cost to use the space shuttle ONE time then i'm all for it. imagine being able to go more often and for less money! oimagine being able to go on the drop of a hat compared to the long time it takes to prepe the space shuttle.

and its been proven the space shuttle design just isnt what they once thought it was. the fact they had insulation coming off the tanks tells me its a bad design. with a smaller craft you can eliminate THAT problem, which has cost us 7 lives at least once and 7 more on a previous ocassion before of o-ring failure on...thats right! the fuel tanks.


there is always a better faster and more effiecient way to do this and NASA nor the government care enough, after all they arent making a profit off this so they dont care how ineffcient their program and crafts are. but we as tax payers DO care.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 03:13 AM
link   
No hopblaze because pop-shots are not space-shots basically.

Again, some privatization is going to occur, where there is a market especially. The market for going to Orbit is VERY small so mainly the development of space travel is going to be limited to when we actually have somewhere to go.

Moon and Mars.

That won't happen for a very long time. We might see multi-millionaires make it into orbit, but no one is footing the bill for a cruise to the Moon or such...so this has to be done through tax dollars.

Also it's one thing to send a ship into space or orbit. It's another thing to pilot it. NASA has managed to gather many of the best pilots it can find, most companies will have a harder time doing that without a substantial amount of money. Not so much to find a potential Astronaut, but to train him and get him all fitted to be a pilot in space. NASA trains their candidates for 1 year at least, and all have to fly T-38s, and so forth and all that's expensive as well.

See the main problem is there is nothing off the earth that at this time we truly need.

Helium-3 was a good try, but really...we aren't using it...and no one cares to use it. We have oil, we have nuclear power, we are researching fusion power. We don't need to worry about Helium-3 for ourselves.

Unless a wonder material was discovered on Mars that absolutely made nothing but huge profits for people on earth...it's not going to generate a large expansion.

Hmm...the largest colonizing factor in the history of the world was Gold...there is a lot of Gold in Space...but the amount you could bring back could potentially ruin the market, making it not worth getting in the first place.

Like I said the reasons for privatization's ultimate failure are numerous.

It's just going to take time, and when it happens, it will be supply. Private companies will take over supplying areas that NASA sets up. I can imagine a Moon Base Clavius as in 2001: A Space Odyssee.

Where NASA sets it up, it's basically a large research facility, and now some private company begins to supply it while NASA goes off elsewhere...but even this is unreasonable.

Realize one thing.

NASA is only a small fraction of the Space industry. The Space industry is only private...NASA simply puts all the pieces together and supplies the astronauts.

What you are truly talking about is privatization for space flight...right now getting to be an Astronaut is very difficult.

Well that is always going to remain that way. For the same reasons that test piloting is not something anyone does.

Can a company make its own spaceship?

Sure...Grumman made the LM which landed on the Moon.

North American made the CSM which took men to the Moon.

But should these companies supply their own Astronauts? No.

Because there is too much ELSE involved.

When you want to think of the problems of privatization, think of that.

A company can shoot a rocket capable of keeping a man alive in space, into orbit, but for that man to pilot that craft he needs large amounts of ground crews.

Thousands of people to check the ship, dozens to monitor it minute by minute. So forth.

NASA is a combination of MANY industries and skills, to form what is "manned spaceflight".

One company doing that is never going to happen if it takes NASA hundreds of companies to do what it does.

This post was kind of a "work-it-out as I go" post...so forgive how it seems to shift positions.

But I'm trying to paint the full picture here.

Because it is a lot more than just money...

Remember NASA had 400,000 people working to put men on the Moon...most companies have a few thousand employees.

I think some of the largest have only somewhere in the 30 or 40 thousands.

In conclusion: We are "privatizing space". But the privatized parts are all fitted together in a government institution called NASA.

Well anyways hopefully this makes you see a larger picture so as to see the hurdles that have to be overcome before one company can do all the work and produce a profit.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 03:21 AM
link   
I just realized a good analogy, because to me it has the same feeling.

The feeling is the "honor" of being an Astronaut, you don't have honor if you are working for a company, but if you are working for your country, you get that honor.

It's like being a soldier.

We have two types of soldiers in Iraq, government soldiers "G.I.s" and "mercenaries" (which is a HORRIBLE term to call them as most are more patriotic and ideological than the soldiers in the Army or Marines and such. Most are ex-military) Those are Black Water USA contractors.

Both perform the same function...one gets all the credit why? Two reasons...one is Black Water doesn't like publicity for good reasons.

But the second is...what honor is there in being "privatized"?

None.

This goes further...now imagine the Army as NASA.

We can privatize the Army you know? The Army will be paid substantial sums for services and what not, and paid "over-time" for a state of readiness.

On the side, the Army can take jobs from other peoples who are willing to pay enough...pay a million dollars and the Army will send a company anywhere, no questions asked for a week or such.

Everything involving the Army is already Privatized...Military Industrial Complex.

The only thing not privatized is the Army itself.

It is a government "cap" on all those private industries that produces weapons and materials for it.

In many ways (transportation) the Army has been privatized, using private plane companies and such to ship materials around.

But as you can see, in the end, it is unreasonable to actually privatize something that controls so much technology.

NASA controls a lot of technology as well.

So long as NASA is governed by the US Government, it won't do something stupid like say, put Chinese ICBMs up on satellites.

I think this comparison is a strong one.

Privatization of the Astronaut loses the "honor" of exploration that they deserve.

And it also is just complicating matters. Where first you had a well regulated "cap" on a bunch of private industries, working them all in one direction, now you have a market driven "cap" that is interested in profits, and usually profits drive policy. That is not always a good thing.

Imagine having our Army wherever the highest bidder wants it to go.


Imagine NASA doing things for other nations because they pay the best...and those things are not exactly pro-American if you know what I mean.

Regulation has to come from somewhere with such sensitive issues.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 03:25 AM
link   
Another guy argued that NASA doesn't make a profit so doesn't notice inefficiencies of their Space Shuttles.

Well I must point out that NASA did not design and did not make the Space Shuttles.

They were designed and made by private companies doing one thing. Yep ... you guessed it ... making a profit.

The problems with the Space Shuttle is not evidence of how inefficient NASA can be, but how complicated REAL space flight is.

Like I said:

Pop-shots are not Space-shots.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 08:31 AM
link   
I think privatization will happen and should happen. NASA does not need to worry anything about this as well. NASA will always be for Non-Profit basically. (well, at least my guess). They will be the ones sending robotic missions to mars to see if there was once water. Now, once companies start seeing profits and the like, they may send robots, but only if it is in line with their profits... IE sending a rover to MARS to check for oil, gold etc.....type of things. Maybe even sending one to cover the so-called pyramids, or even pics of the first appolo stuff left on the moon. Of course, all for profit from the pics etc. Also space tourism etc, but NASA will always be vital in the areas of pure research... I say bring them all on and trust us into the future... at least I would love to take a week vacation above the earth before I die.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
Another guy argued that NASA doesn't make a profit so doesn't notice inefficiencies of their Space Shuttles.

Well I must point out that NASA did not design and did not make the Space Shuttles.

They were designed and made by private companies doing one thing. Yep ... you guessed it ... making a profit.

The problems with the Space Shuttle is not evidence of how inefficient NASA can be, but how complicated REAL space flight is.

Like I said:

Pop-shots are not Space-shots.


there is a vast difference between being the end user and not. i also think it speaks volumes about nasa's inability to do things like "verify" the products they buy to make sure that they are efficient.

how many companies do YOU know that make something for their own use and have it largely inefficient cumbersome and wasteful? not many and those who do dont stay in business long or their product doesnt.

talk about pot shots...try harder.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 08:58 AM
link   
I like to say we all have our comment lets send them to the presidents commision

www.moontomars.org...

on the front page of the commision is a link were you can send your comments to. which will be taken in to notice and can lead to something which will be brought to the president.

second point.. nasa has a new way for privat org. its like this..

people sending a rover to the moon will receive a prize of 20 miliion dolars and sending a object in to space can be something around 10.000 / 100000 dolars.
its just like the Azari Xprize competition..
only forgotten the name but I know some of you know what I mean.

[Edited on 15-5-2004 by MarkLuitzen]



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 01:13 PM
link   


people sending a rover to mars will receive a prize of 20 miliion dolars and sending a object in to space can be something around 10.000 / 100000 dolars.


I think thats the idea for the X-Prize cup. Smaller prizes for a leapfrog type of competition. I guess they could also offer more big prizes, here is my idea on how they should do it. The first one would probably be Low Earth Orbit($ 1,000,000 prize), secord would be the Moon($ 10,000,000 prize) and third would be mars($ 20,000,000+++ prize). And they should continue until the whole solar system has been explored. Much cheaper and the taxpayers only have to foot part of the prize money. That way NASA can get on with tackling the big problems like how to send mankind to the stars and let private industry exploit the solar system.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 01:31 PM
link   
in space exploration. I think that the scientists should be paid more to find other forms of energy, like maybe magnetics...and work on anti-gravity so we can stand inside the craft even as it turns upside down, our feet will be rooted on the ground and we are able to walk through the craft as it turns up side down. Isolated space from the outside in other words. And more compact oxygen tanks or better yet an oxygen maker because who knows how long the journey in the craft could be. So perhaps we could use alchemy and catalysts in molecules, so that there's a computer machine which vacuums up the molecules in the craft and outside of the craft and turns them into pure oxygen so that there is always a supply.

Yea, I think that General Motors, Fords and Christlers should open up new facilities on their turf and begin creating new crafts. Sporty space crafts that could fit six to eight people easily. And I think all of them should pay their scientists and physicists more attention and more money. I think some of those big oil and gas corporations should give those inventors ideas that are sitting on their shelves to someone who is willing to create and experiment with them.

[Edited on 5/15/2004 by SamaraMorgueAnn]



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 02:34 PM
link   
believe in space, I think its all a lie. Its actually a large curtain with holes in it. On the other side of the curtain Godo is discussing fish with Fanny Craddock. The space budget is actually used to explore the military capacity of the humble yet extremely inteligent earth worm. Worms with tiny bombs made from antimatter capable of destroying uranus.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Smudge
The space budget is actually used to explore the military capacity of the humble yet extremely inteligent earth worm. Worms with tiny bombs made from antimatter capable of destroying uranus.


Actually I heard they were sacking all that money into the 'ant' project. They're trying to develop a ray gun that shoots killer ants out at the enemy instead of using a regular gun.

Then they're going to put them on the moon in an effort to explore space, because they're so hardy.

[Edited on 5/15/2004 by SamaraMorgueAnn]



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Really? Damn ! nobody tells me anything. I'd just recently managed to get my worms to come when I whistle ( your mind is disgusting ) and was well on my way to submitting them to boot camp. Oh well, ants you say...interesting potential.



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Yea! Ants! Aaaand I have also heard that the new green span? What do you call those people who are into the green stuff? Well they're forcing the government to use grasshoppers to invade those nasty countries instead of bombs. That way when the cloud of grasshoppers are dropped on their country, they won't have anything left to eat, so they're gonna haf ta bargain with the government so they don't starve to death! And then they'll take them to outer space and sic them on the aliens if they want to try and start a fight.

I believe in outer space. It's everywhere! Everyone should be interested in it!


[Edited on 5/15/2004 by SamaraMorgueAnn]





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join