This article sounded promising.
NASA is sure to get an injection of cash to rescue its faltering human space exploration programme, says a well-connected space policy
Former Lockheed Martin CEO Norman Augustine says NASA needs at least $3 Billion more each year to "support meaningful human space exploration".
John Logsdon, a Washington insider, believes NASA will get their budget boost, but because of the economy & political situation thinks it might not be
the full $3 Billion.
So, do you think it is worth an extra $3 Billion each year to send humans to go out and explore space?
I believe they are working on a 'swarm' type recognizance system now, they work together to collect data.
Also, the rovers proved their worth I think. The companies responsible for building them did an excellent job. Hopefully, they will figure out how
to free the trapped rover before winter hits it... Isn't there a 'arm' on the rover? Couldn't it just leverage itself up using the arm? Like a
Anyway, Voyageur's I & II are still flying through space (Last I heard) and are still being operated.
San Francisco, CA. - NASA's Voyager 2 spacecraft has followed its twin Voyager 1 into the solar system's final frontier, a vast region at the
edge of our solar system where the solar wind runs up against the thin gas between the stars.
I think getting humans into space is important. I think a resonable goal to start with would be a Moon base. Continue to use robotics to explore
asteroids, other planets, Moons, etc. But, at least get a Moon base started. No deterioration of orbit. Home base for exploration even further out
once technology and advantages are realized.
So, I think it is worth the $3 Billion. Compared to the Defense Budget, a small sliver off the pie couldn't hurt...
Of course, the USA could work cooperatively with international partners to help fund the initiative.
[edit on 12-12-2009 by ByteChanger]