It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The USA Space Exploration Round Table

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Okay the NASA space program has cancelled there manned space program so now what?
What do you propose would be a viable solution to get a manned space program up and running?
We technically already have a rocket although I am not sure that it can hold people:
SpaceX.
I understand this privately funded company has only 1 customer NASA.
So what if? What if we could raise money online and pay the necessary fee and just do it just fly to Mars?
I think it is time for people to stop complaining and pegging NASA as the victim. NASA is not the victim here the AMERICAN people are!

The final cost of project Apollo was reported to Congress as $25.4 billion in 1973.~wikipedia


Okay so you mean to tell me it cost $25.4 billion in 1973 yet NASA has since then squandered billions of dollars on low orbit missions and rover launches?

There are some die hard NASA fans out there that feel like the only people who can do anything of importance is NASA. I used to be one of them until (I woke up) the LRO mission. Did anyone else follow this mission?
I won't talk about the disappointment that was the impact. I wish to talk about the events that transpired afterwards. A while after impact I was looking at CNN.com, when they still had a science section, and there were conflicting reports of the costs. Some articles said 79 million others said 89 million.

Also why was it necessary, if we already had moon rock samples, for them to bomb the moon? Does anyone remember the official statements we recieved from NASA? I remember one article in which a NASA worker was saying he would have to go through the data to see if there was water.

Thats all fine and well but wouldn't it have been easier for NASA to just send another human being there? It took them weeks to finally declare we found water on the moon. However what if there was a outpost space station orbiting the moon? Then it wouldn't take weeks to figure that out.

Now is the time for us to stop spending millions on data mining, recycled missions, Mars simulated missions, and start actually going. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe there is a law on the books that says a private company cannot launch a manned mission.

The shuttle is available for sell.
1. We could build a website(domain names are relatively cheap).
2. Ask for donations.
3. Buy the shuttle.
4. Buy some land in Tx.
5. And plan our own manned mission to the Moon.

Now who feels that they would be able to fly the shuttle?
Who can navigate?
How many of you would actually fly to the Moon for free?




[edit on 14-6-2010 by packinupngoin]




posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by packinupngoin
Okay so you mean to tell me it cost $25.4 billion in 1973 yet NASA has since then squandered billions of dollars on low orbit missions and rover launches?


First off I would hardly call all the missions since the Apollo program squandered resources. There have been tons of very important data obtained. The moon landings was a national effort to beat the Soviet Union to the moon. We have no national strategy at the moment. Second. Could we afford it if we wanted to go back? No, not now or for the foreseeable future.



Also why was it necessary, if we already had moon rock samples, for them to bomb the moon? Does anyone remember the official statements we recieved from NASA? I remember one article in which a NASA worker was saying he would have to go through the data to see if there was water.


NASA didn't BOMB the moon! They crashed a space craft into it. Apparently when another space craft was allowed to impact on the moon a few decades ago it vibrated, RANG or reverberated for a long time like a bell. They postulated that it was lunar water related and they tried to reproduce the effect.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
25.000.000.000 is of course quite a bit more than 80.000.000.
Now, adjusted for inflation the 25.000.000.000 become 125.000.000.000
Thats 1526 LRO Missions.
Or 91 LRO Missions per Apollo Mission

Just for a little perspective.

While sending probes and rovers sounds a lot less sexy than putting a man on mars, It just gives you a lot more science for your buck. And robotics have come a long way. Look at little spirit. Designed for 90 days, roving around on mars for 6 years. No need to plan for a return trip either (cutting cost roughly in half) No need for life support. And can we have a show of hands, who wants to spend 6 years on mars, analyzing rocks? (And no, we cant guarantee you will find a shadow vessel)



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
first of all, i wouldn't join this project for the simple fact that the OP wants to use the shuttle. to go to the moon. i mean, think about it for a second. are you seriously going to try to do what the developers of the shuttle didn't even think of doing? can the shuttle even survive going to the moon and back? was it even designed to do so? try to do some research on the shuttle first (what it is, what it was built for) .. before you even start thinking about buying it. just because its being sold doesn't mean that it is the right tool to use for what you are proposing.

now if i was to make a suggestion, i would approach these guys:



and Copenhagen Suborbitals

and SpaceX and Bigelow. heck, talk to branson .. just talk to people and ask questions, listen to their answers and try to learn from them. and above all, don't stop dreaming just because you encounter a couple of old farts like me.
good luck.
[EDIT for better video]

[edit on 6.14.10 by toreishi]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by debunky
 


See thats what I mean. I see all of this talk about how sad people are that the shuttle program has ended. Or better yet "OBAMA doesn't want to put people in space!!!"

Riiight. Again I want to know why is it that only NASA can go into space.

We could even have a reality tv show like "Who wants to be a Astronaut" to generate revenue and funds for the expedition.
This is a thread geared towards ideas and possibilities. So lets throw some out there.


[edit on 14-6-2010 by packinupngoin]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Its not only NASA
There is ESA, JAXA, the russians, the indians, the chinese.
(Ok, thats about it)
Oh, yes, Iran shoots pets into space

still.

Looking at it in data/$ it is just much more sensible to let the humans back on earth, and just send the hardware up.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by debunky
 


I'm aware of the other space programs I just think that we should have a American based space program geared towards the colonization of space.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
I would write a $100 donation check straight to NASA now, if the new administrator would state on public record that: NASA will now develop quantum anti-gravity launch and propulsion for their next manned space mission. But I won't support any more pathetic rocket-propulsion.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by packinupngoin
 


1. 25 bilion cost for Apollo is more like 100+ billion today, if you account for inflation. It was a national priority back then, today it is not, sadly.

2. The point of LRO mission was to probe water ice located in permanently shadowed craters. Apollo rocks or even a space station in lunar orbit would not help in this case. I dont know why you lost your trust in NASA because of LRO, the mission was a succes. Maybe the puff it produced was too small for you?


3. Using shuttle to go to the Moon is a really bad idea. It was designed for a totaly different purpose. What we desperately need is to develop new heavy launch vehicle. Its construction is scheduled to begin in 2015.




top topics



 
2

log in

join